You're complaining about gay people not hiding their sexuality while at the same time informing everyone of your supposed heterosexuality. Why should gays be discreet when straight aren't?
Murderstyle75
Well there is a time and a place for everything however much of the gay community really seems to be pretty "In YO Face" about it. Interesting though how a pride festival which is supposed to be about civil rights is pretty sexually explicit. Do you honestly think gay pride represents the average day to day life of a gay person? You said it yourself "there is a time and place for everything"
[QUOTE="dave123321"][QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="dave123321"] I just don't see why my posts would allude to my sexuality when most of my posts are unrelated to anything dealing with sexuality. If you were open about your sexuality it would come through the personality you display in your posts. There are three types of sexual pairings: Dominant - dominant (the most profound) Dominant - submissive (most common) Submissive - submissive (unnatural and wrong) Also these qualities apply separately for the body and the mind. As in, someone can be physically submissive but mentally (psychologically, emotionally, etc.) dominant. These characteristics of dominance and submission should show in your posts, but you do not allow it to (at least not much). So what qualities do gays have? Gays can be any combination, just like straights. However a male-female pairing is necessarily dominant-submissive with regards to the body. A female is incapable of being physically dominant in sex, and the most moral sex is between two individuals inclined towards dominance, struggling against each other for control. Recognition of that is what I call rational homosexuality, which is distinct from biological homosexuality (where a man is attracted to another man by instinctive urges rather than a rational thought-process).
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="dave123321"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] If you were open about your sexuality it would come through the personality you display in your posts. There are three types of sexual pairings: Dominant - dominant (the most profound) Dominant - submissive (most common) Submissive - submissive (unnatural and wrong) Also these qualities apply separately for the body and the mind. As in, someone can be physically submissive but mentally (psychologically, emotionally, etc.) dominant. These characteristics of dominance and submission should show in your posts, but you do not allow it to (at least not much). So what qualities do gays have? Gays can be any combination, just like straights. However a male-female pairing is necessarily dominant-submissive with regards to the body. A female is incapable of being physically dominant in sex, and the most moral sex is between two individuals inclined towards dominance, struggling against each other for control. Recognition of that is what I call rational homosexuality, which is distinct from biological homosexuality (where a man is attracted to another man by instinctive urges rather than a rational thought-process). A dominatrix seems to be perfectly capable of dominating men in the boudoir.
[QUOTE="dave123321"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] If you were open about your sexuality it would come through the personality you display in your posts. There are three types of sexual pairings: Dominant - dominant (the most profound) Dominant - submissive (most common) Submissive - submissive (unnatural and wrong) Also these qualities apply separately for the body and the mind. As in, someone can be physically submissive but mentally (psychologically, emotionally, etc.) dominant. These characteristics of dominance and submission should show in your posts, but you do not allow it to (at least not much).Laihendi
So what qualities do gays have? Gays can be any combination, just like straights. However a male-female pairing is necessarily dominant-submissive with regards to the body. A female is incapable of being physically dominant in sex, and the most moral sex is between two individuals inclined towards dominance, struggling against each other for control. Recognition of that is what I call rational homosexuality, which is distinct from biological homosexuality (where a man is attracted to another man by instinctive urges rather than a rational thought-process).Seems someone hasn't heard of pegging. Come on even I know females can be dominant.
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="dave123321"] So what qualities do gays have?toast_burner
Gays can be any combination, just like straights. However a male-female pairing is necessarily dominant-submissive with regards to the body. A female is incapable of being physically dominant in sex, and the most moral sex is between two individuals inclined towards dominance, struggling against each other for control. Recognition of that is what I call rational homosexuality, which is distinct from biological homosexuality (where a man is attracted to another man by instinctive urges rather than a rational thought-process).Seems someone hasn't heard of pegging. Come on even I know females can be dominant.
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="dave123321"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] If you were open about your sexuality it would come through the personality you display in your posts. There are three types of sexual pairings: Dominant - dominant (the most profound) Dominant - submissive (most common) Submissive - submissive (unnatural and wrong) Also these qualities apply separately for the body and the mind. As in, someone can be physically submissive but mentally (psychologically, emotionally, etc.) dominant. These characteristics of dominance and submission should show in your posts, but you do not allow it to (at least not much). So what qualities do gays have? Gays can be any combination, just like straights. However a male-female pairing is necessarily dominant-submissive with regards to the body. A female is incapable of being physically dominant in sex, and the most moral sex is between two individuals inclined towards dominance, struggling against each other for control. Recognition of that is what I call rational homosexuality, which is distinct from biological homosexuality (where a man is attracted to another man by instinctive urges rather than a rational thought-process). So the most profound sexual paring is between two guys regardless of their sexuality? By rational thought, I should want to sleep with someone dominant like air? Is lesbian sex therefore the least profound and irrational? Being wrong and unnatural?
[QUOTE="dave123321"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] If you were open about your sexuality it would come through the personality you display in your posts. There are three types of sexual pairings: Dominant - dominant (the most profound) Dominant - submissive (most common) Submissive - submissive (unnatural and wrong) Also these qualities apply separately for the body and the mind. As in, someone can be physically submissive but mentally (psychologically, emotionally, etc.) dominant. These characteristics of dominance and submission should show in your posts, but you do not allow it to (at least not much).Laihendi
So what qualities do gays have? Gays can be any combination, just like straights. However a male-female pairing is necessarily dominant-submissive with regards to the body. A female is incapable of being physically dominant in sex, and the most moral sex is between two individuals inclined towards dominance, struggling against each other for control. Recognition of that is what I call rational homosexuality, which is distinct from biological homosexuality (where a man is attracted to another man by instinctive urges rather than a rational thought-process).
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="dave123321"] So what qualities do gays have?toast_burner
Gays can be any combination, just like straights. However a male-female pairing is necessarily dominant-submissive with regards to the body. A female is incapable of being physically dominant in sex, and the most moral sex is between two individuals inclined towards dominance, struggling against each other for control. Recognition of that is what I call rational homosexuality, which is distinct from biological homosexuality (where a man is attracted to another man by instinctive urges rather than a rational thought-process).Seems someone hasn't heard of pegging. Come on even I know females can be dominant.
Given your views on sex I doubt you get much.
A man getting pegged doesn't necessarily mean he's being dominated. They often overlap, but not necessarily.
[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Gays can be any combination, just like straights. However a male-female pairing is necessarily dominant-submissive with regards to the body. A female is incapable of being physically dominant in sex, and the most moral sex is between two individuals inclined towards dominance, struggling against each other for control. Recognition of that is what I call rational homosexuality, which is distinct from biological homosexuality (where a man is attracted to another man by instinctive urges rather than a rational thought-process).Rhazakna
Seems someone hasn't heard of pegging. Come on even I know females can be dominant.
Given your views on sex I doubt you get much.
A man getting pegged doesn't necessarily mean he's being dominated. They often overlap, but not necessarily.It seems in his naive veiw dominating simply means who's the one doing the penetrating.
[QUOTE="Rhazakna"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]Seems someone hasn't heard of pegging. Come on even I know females can be dominant.
Given your views on sex I doubt you get much.
toast_burner
A man getting pegged doesn't necessarily mean he's being dominated. They often overlap, but not necessarily.It seems in his naive veiw dominating simply means who's the one doing the penetrating. Oh. Well, that's pretty uninformed, then. A dominatrix I know loves teasing her men by riding them, then jumping off right before he's about to burst.
[QUOTE="dave123321"][QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="dave123321"] So what qualities do gays have? Gays can be any combination, just like straights. However a male-female pairing is necessarily dominant-submissive with regards to the body. A female is incapable of being physically dominant in sex, and the most moral sex is between two individuals inclined towards dominance, struggling against each other for control. Recognition of that is what I call rational homosexuality, which is distinct from biological homosexuality (where a man is attracted to another man by instinctive urges rather than a rational thought-process). So the most profound sexual paring is between two guys regardless of their sexuality? By rational thought, I should want to sleep with someone dominant like air? Is lesbian sex therefore the least profound and irrational? Being wrong and unnatural? Physically, yes. However the mental aspect must be taken into consideration as well. Lesbian sex is irrational and I do not approve of it, but of course I am not advocating laws against it.
[QUOTE="dave123321"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] Gays can be any combination, just like straights. However a male-female pairing is necessarily dominant-submissive with regards to the body. A female is incapable of being physically dominant in sex, and the most moral sex is between two individuals inclined towards dominance, struggling against each other for control. Recognition of that is what I call rational homosexuality, which is distinct from biological homosexuality (where a man is attracted to another man by instinctive urges rather than a rational thought-process).Laihendi
So the most profound sexual paring is between two guys regardless of their sexuality? By rational thought, I should want to sleep with someone dominant like air? Is lesbian sex therefore the least profound and irrational? Being wrong and unnatural? Physically, yes. However the mental aspect must be taken into consideration as well. Lesbian sex is irrational and I do not approve of it, but of course I am not advocating laws against it.
Goddamn, you just keep getting more nonsensical as time goes on.
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="dave123321"] So the most profound sexual paring is between two guys regardless of their sexuality? By rational thought, I should want to sleep with someone dominant like air? Is lesbian sex therefore the least profound and irrational? Being wrong and unnatural?worlock77
Physically, yes. However the mental aspect must be taken into consideration as well. Lesbian sex is irrational and I do not approve of it, but of course I am not advocating laws against it.
Goddamn, you just keep getting more nonsensical as time goes on.
Perhaps this is Laihendi's way of rationalizing Rand's open distaste for homosexuality.
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="dave123321"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] Gays can be any combination, just like straights. However a male-female pairing is necessarily dominant-submissive with regards to the body. A female is incapable of being physically dominant in sex, and the most moral sex is between two individuals inclined towards dominance, struggling against each other for control. Recognition of that is what I call rational homosexuality, which is distinct from biological homosexuality (where a man is attracted to another man by instinctive urges rather than a rational thought-process). So the most profound sexual paring is between two guys regardless of their sexuality? By rational thought, I should want to sleep with someone dominant like air? Is lesbian sex therefore the least profound and irrational? Being wrong and unnatural? Physically, yes. However the mental aspect must be taken into consideration as well. Lesbian sex is irrational and I do not approve of it, but of course I am not advocating laws against it. A holistic approach?
[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Physically, yes. However the mental aspect must be taken into consideration as well. Lesbian sex is irrational and I do not approve of it, but of course I am not advocating laws against it.Rhazakna
Goddamn, you just keep getting more nonsensical as time goes on.
Perhaps this is Laihendi's way of rationalizing Rand's open distaste for homosexuality.
It kinda reminds me of Banky Edwards' (Jason Lee) "deep dicking" spiel in the film 'Chasing Amy'.
You're complaining about gay people not hiding their sexuality while at the same time informing everyone of your supposed heterosexuality. Why should gays be discreet when straight aren't?
toast_burner
Well there is a time and a place for everything however much of the gay community really seems to be pretty "In YO Face" about it. Interesting though how a pride festival which is supposed to be about civil rights is pretty sexually explicit. Do you honestly think gay pride represents the average day to day life of a gay person? You said it yourself "there is a time and place for everything" And during their day to day, they are blending on however whenever there is a gay event, its strap on's and assess chaps for everybody. These pride events should have some kind of morals surrounding them or else the views of soceity will not change. I can give plenty of examples such as whenever I drive through Ferndale or Plesent Ridge which are in the top 10 for most gay cities, you are almost gaurenteed to see something like a hairy man wearing a thong or speedo. Not really a place where I would take the family for dinner. If they really want rights and acceptance, they need to silence the freaks. I mean take that **** to a night club or something. Not out in the public streets.
[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Lesbian sex is irrational and I do not approve of it, but of course I am not advocating laws against it.Allicrombie
You're quite the charmer. It might be possible for one female to dominate the other physically, but the body is not naturally facilitated to do that.
And yes I believe this explains Rand's dislike of homosexuality. When she said it is immoral, she was speaking from the perspective of a woman who recognized that it was rational for her to sexually desire a man. This has no bearing on male homosexuality.
[QUOTE="dave123321"][QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="dave123321"] So the most profound sexual paring is between two guys regardless of their sexuality? By rational thought, I should want to sleep with someone dominant like air? Is lesbian sex therefore the least profound and irrational? Being wrong and unnatural? Physically, yes. However the mental aspect must be taken into consideration as well. Lesbian sex is irrational and I do not approve of it, but of course I am not advocating laws against it. A holistic approach? I do not understand what you are asking.
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="dave123321"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] Physically, yes. However the mental aspect must be taken into consideration as well. Lesbian sex is irrational and I do not approve of it, but of course I am not advocating laws against it. A holistic approach? I do not understand what you are asking. Holistic, pertains to the body and mind. Maybe to spirituality too. Interconnectedness of the systems as a whole
[QUOTE="dave123321"][QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="dave123321"] A holistic approach? I do not understand what you are asking. Holistic, pertains to the body and mind. Maybe to spirituality too.Yes the body and mind must both be taken into consideration in sex.
[QUOTE="Murderstyle75"] Well there is a time and a place for everything however much of the gay community really seems to be pretty "In YO Face" about it. Interesting though how a pride festival which is supposed to be about civil rights is pretty sexually explicit. Murderstyle75
Do you honestly think gay pride represents the average day to day life of a gay person? You said it yourself "there is a time and place for everything" And during their day to day, they are blending on however whenever there is a gay event, its strap on's and assess chaps for everybody. These pride events should have some kind of morals surrounding them or else the views of soceity will not change. I can give plenty of examples such as whenever I drive through Ferndale or Plesent Ridge which are in the top 10 for most gay cities, you are almost gaurenteed to see something like a hairy man wearing a thong or speedo. Not really a place where I would take the family for dinner. If they really want rights and acceptance, they need to silence the freaks. I mean take that **** to a night club or something. Not out in the public streets."silence the freaks" alright, shut up.
[QUOTE="MrPraline"]kind of a big deal around hereRing_of_fire
But if all guys were...Then it means no more humans. Can'T believe my kid is growing up in this stupid world of selfishness and lack of family values. It not like you guys care about kids and their future. All you think about is you!
Gay people have families too. Oh, you meant bigoted straight family values. exactly. furthermore UNLIKE 90% of msot modern straight marriages we dont have commercialization of the ceremony. its more about the novelty of doing it to straight couples, than it is about it being an ultimate symbol of commitment. i a homosexual or even a straight transgender relationship marriage has billions of times more symbolic value (or at least one would hope). as they arent marketed towards nor are they more concerned about passing on their genetic legacy to the next generation.
so homosexuality should be embraced it is what is fueling some of the most important things in a relationship anymore (or is contributing the most)
[QUOTE="dave123321"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] If you were open about your sexuality it would come through the personality you display in your posts. There are three types of sexual pairings: Dominant - dominant (the most profound) Dominant - submissive (most common) Submissive - submissive (unnatural and wrong) Also these qualities apply separately for the body and the mind. As in, someone can be physically submissive but mentally (psychologically, emotionally, etc.) dominant. These characteristics of dominance and submission should show in your posts, but you do not allow it to (at least not much).Laihendi
So what qualities do gays have? Gays can be any combination, just like straights. However a male-female pairing is necessarily dominant-submissive with regards to the body. A female is incapable of being physically dominant in sex, and the most moral sex is between two individuals inclined towards dominance, struggling against each other for control. Recognition of that is what I call rational homosexuality, which is distinct from biological homosexuality (where a man is attracted to another man by instinctive urges rather than a rational thought-process).I feel like a psychiatrist could spend a week dissecting this one statement of yours, Lai. Part of me is fascinated at how you came to that conclusion. Part of me fears I already know.
But if all guys were...Then it means no more humans. Can'T believe my kid is growing up in this stupid world of selfishness and lack of family values. It not like you guys care about kids and their future. All you think about is you!
Heterosexuals vastly outnumber homosexuals, and even if straight people were a minority, human populations would still grow, only at a slower pace.
[QUOTE="MrPraline"][QUOTE="jimkabrhel"][QUOTE="MrPraline"] That's not very nice bro. Cars can hurt. Did someone just threaten me in French? Classy. Yeah he said he hopes you get hit by a car lol LOL, I found this out in Google Translate. I'm surprised it translated a full sentence for me perfectly. Usually it's only half decent at translating.
[QUOTE="dave123321"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] Gays can be any combination, just like straights. However a male-female pairing is necessarily dominant-submissive with regards to the body. A female is incapable of being physically dominant in sex, and the most moral sex is between two individuals inclined towards dominance, struggling against each other for control. Recognition of that is what I call rational homosexuality, which is distinct from biological homosexuality (where a man is attracted to another man by instinctive urges rather than a rational thought-process).Laihendi
So the most profound sexual paring is between two guys regardless of their sexuality? By rational thought, I should want to sleep with someone dominant like air? Is lesbian sex therefore the least profound and irrational? Being wrong and unnatural? Physically, yes. However the mental aspect must be taken into consideration as well. Lesbian sex is irrational and I do not approve of it, but of course I am not advocating laws against it.
How is lesbian sex irrational? If sex between 2 dominant partners (males) is, then why not two submissive (female) partners?
Although your clearly trolling, I do have an opinion on this. I don't think anyone should have to hide their sexual orientation but I think it's weird that there are parades and days dedicated to their preference in the bedroom.
I guess it's hard to find gays so you gotta shake your feathers around to see who bites? That's the only excuse I can think of for such obnoxious behavior.
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="dave123321"] So the most profound sexual paring is between two guys regardless of their sexuality? By rational thought, I should want to sleep with someone dominant like air? Is lesbian sex therefore the least profound and irrational? Being wrong and unnatural?GOGOGOGURT
Physically, yes. However the mental aspect must be taken into consideration as well. Lesbian sex is irrational and I do not approve of it, but of course I am not advocating laws against it.
How is lesbian sex irrational? If sex between 2 dominant partners (males) is, then why not two submissive (female) partners?
Or are you saying something different?
Sex between two people inclined towards dominance is a struggle between two heroic individuals. It is a struggle of strength against strength, and virtue against virtue. Sex between two submissive people is the opposite of that.
[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Physically, yes. However the mental aspect must be taken into consideration as well. Lesbian sex is irrational and I do not approve of it, but of course I am not advocating laws against it.Laihendi
How is lesbian sex irrational? If sex between 2 dominant partners (males) is, then why not two submissive (female) partners?
Or are you saying something different?
Sex between two people inclined towards dominance is a struggle between two heroic individuals. It is a struggle of strength against strength, and virtue against virtue. Sex between two submissive people is the opposite of that.Do you ever get out of your parents basement?
No, just as heterosexual people shouldn't have to hide their orientation from homosexual people. Also, I find it very amusing how heterosexist people think that homosexual people are "too open" about their orientation even though this culture is heavily heteronormative and so encourages heterosexuality more than any other orientation.
[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Physically, yes. However the mental aspect must be taken into consideration as well. Lesbian sex is irrational and I do not approve of it, but of course I am not advocating laws against it.Laihendi
How is lesbian sex irrational? If sex between 2 dominant partners (males) is, then why not two submissive (female) partners?
Or are you saying something different?
Sex between two people inclined towards dominance is a struggle between two heroic individuals. It is a struggle of strength against strength, and virtue against virtue. Sex between two submissive people is the opposite of that.You seem to get more stupid everyday. Bravo.
[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Physically, yes. However the mental aspect must be taken into consideration as well. Lesbian sex is irrational and I do not approve of it, but of course I am not advocating laws against it.Laihendi
How is lesbian sex irrational? If sex between 2 dominant partners (males) is, then why not two submissive (female) partners?
Or are you saying something different?
Sex between two people inclined towards dominance is a struggle between two heroic individuals. It is a struggle of strength against strength, and virtue against virtue. Sex between two submissive people is the opposite of that.
[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Physically, yes. However the mental aspect must be taken into consideration as well. Lesbian sex is irrational and I do not approve of it, but of course I am not advocating laws against it.Laihendi
How is lesbian sex irrational? If sex between 2 dominant partners (males) is, then why not two submissive (female) partners?
Or are you saying something different?
Sex between two people inclined towards dominance is a struggle between two heroic individuals. It is a struggle of strength against strength, and virtue against virtue. Sex between two submissive people is the opposite of that.
Log in to comment