It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Four-year-olds will get gay fairytales at school

page: 7
7
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 


Situational sexuality, AKA "What happens in prison stays in prison". Heterosexual men seeking out and taking an active role in homosexual relationships(thus homosexual attraction and arousal as shown by an erection) who then return to heterosexual relationships after being released from prison. This absolutely qualifies as a change in sexuality and shows that anyone can, given the motive, change their sexuality.

What about married men who have kids and then decide that they're gay? Somewhere along the line there was at least one change in sexuality.

Most people seem to be actively aware of people being able to switch to gay either temporarily or fully but freak out when someone says that the reverse is possible as well. Is that because they believe that homosexuality will lose the political power that it has today if it is proven that sexuality can be consciously altered and that homosexuality can be changed? I guess "We're here, we're queer, we're seeking therapy to live more normal lives" would take a bit out of the arrogant, self-centered pride that the gay movement and gay community has.

The differences between homosexual and heterosexual males are easily spotted(thus, the infamous "gaydar" and statements like "he looks gay to me".) There are a series of body language, voice tone, behavioral, subtle body changes, and odor differences between the two sexualities. The difference between homosexual and heterosexual behavior is what I find most irritating about gays(in other words, they behave differently and I'm judging them based on the basic behavioral differences). I do honestly believe that being homosexual leads to undesirable behavior and thought patterns and for this reason should be prevented or brought under control(by balancing the changes caused by homosexuality with the changes caused by heterosexuality).

If we just "accept" people for "who they are" no serious research will be done or accepted that might challenge or change our views of who they are. And if we start emphasizing how great it is to be gay(like all the gay television stereotypes where gays are smarter, wittier, and better than heterosexual men or make a big, PC point to the kids about how you would love them if they were gay) before natural sexuality even begins to kick in or present itself, that's going to have an effect on the kids on a statistical level.

Gay men really do not like male bisexuals, from my experience. Either they deny that they exist, lie and say that they're bisexual as a part of that "masculine background story" that they tell when they want to get into your pants, or they refuse to accept you for who you are and try to make you fully gay(apparently, only their sexuality is acceptable to them). It's like "fine, be bi but only have sex with men".




posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Epinephrine
 


This absolutely qualifies as a change in sexuality

No it isn’t, this shows your weak understanding of such issues and I’d like to see a source that supports any of these claims on your warped understanding of sexuality or social issues. These men are never gay; having sex with a male if you are a male does not define sexuality. You are either confused or have no idea what you are talking about, and I’d like to see what sources lead you to such conclusions? Do you even know the simple definitions of sexuality?

What about married men who have kids and then decide that they're gay?

Those men are never “straight” to begin with, they’ll tell you so themselves.

Most people seem to be actively aware of people being able to switch

And you come to this conclusion how? Most people have a better understanding of complex sexual social situations and the simple definitions of sexuality than you.

live more normal lives

You obviously have no concept of “normal”. Normal is whatever a society decides it is at a given point in time, homosexuality has been constant and fluent in society, it is one of the most normal occurrences in our culture.

The differences between homosexual and heterosexual males are easily spotted

Absolutely untrue, again where do you get this outdated, untrue knowledge? Some gay men are more effeminate as there are also more butch or effeminate straight people of different gender roles.

I do honestly believe

I don’t care about what you believe, I care about facts, decades of research, and what thousands of psychiatrist a across the world have determined over and over again. This debate is useless, you have nothing to state than your warped opinion, which shows a severe lack of knowledge of human complexity, and you will not address any of the outrageous claims you made on the actual subject of this thread.

we just "accept" people for "who they are" no serious research will be done or accepted

That is bunk as well, bunk I know you will not be able to support with an ounce of proof. Many scientist are still involved in this research to date, respected scientist, again you show your lack of knowledge on this issue.

that's going to have an effect on the kids on a statistical level.

First show me where we are teaching kids it is great to be gay? We are simply teaching them tolerance and that it does not make you lesser than a straight person. Secondly what proof do you have to support these claims that it such teaching will affect children badly?

Gay men really do not like male bisexuals, from my experience

Again with your uninformed arrogance, not all gay men live by your own presumed notions. I’d like some proof for these claims were you flat out accuse all gay men of being and thinking exactly as you believe they are or do.



posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Scientists who study sexuality study male sexuality by arousal response. If there is a change in arousal response, there is a change in sexuality. The situational sexuality found in prison shows that new arousal responses that were previously lacking can be produced by social situations and stimulations. Furthermore, there has to have been an arousal response to a woman at some point in the man who experiences a middle-aged sexuality shift. By the standards of science that are used to study sexuality, prison sex shows that you can make a person gay or bisexual.


While you put a lot of stock in the subjective experiences and beliefs of homosexuals about the nature of their condition, the fact is that the average human lacks the insight into his or her neurological and chemical activity and can only inaccurately guess at their responses. There is no scientific data to support your statement, only homosexual propaganda and personal beliefs(your own and others). If personal beliefs are not valid then why do insist on bringing them up as an argument?



posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Epinephrine
 


Scientists who study sexuality study male sexuality by arousal response. If there is a change in arousal response, there is a change in sexuality.

Again where do you get this? Support your claims.

prison sex shows that you can make a person gay or bisexual.

Nope, and I’d like to see scientific study that says so.

There is no scientific data to support your statement, only homosexual propaganda and personal beliefs(your own and others). If personal beliefs are not valid then why do insist on bringing them up as an argument?

Your opinion is not valid because 1) scientificly neither side has any definite answers, I am discussing your idea of how mental health and sexuality works, 2) when it comes to those two things you have been wrong and misguided on every account. 3) I am still waiting for you to prove homosexuality has an adverse affect on children and the claims you have made about what these gay fairy tales entail.

Here are two sites that support every claim I make with decades of research:
www.apa.org...
www.apa.org...



posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Epinephrine
 


Also I'm still waiting for you to prove your statements about gay men especially and their opinions toward bisexuality.



posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Epinephrine
 


By the way before you state the American Psychological Association is "gay propaganda" I'd like to see proof to this statement as well and studies that contradict or counter the APA's decades of research.



posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 11:49 PM
link   
Homosexuality was declassified as a mental illness by the APA as the result of political pressures, not science or scientific discoveries. There is more than enough information to prove that politics alone, mostly from gay lobbyists, was the deciding factor in changing the APA's stance on homosexuality. How much respect did you really hope to achieve by referencing links to an organization that changed its position on homosexuality completely because of pressure homosexuals themselves? Hardly a scientific proof of theory! So far, no scientific study has proven that homosexuals are "normal", though some have shown various neurological differences between homosexuals and the rest of the population. Much in the same way, the brains of schizophrenics and psychopaths display different brain structure and brain activity and this information is used as proof that schizophrenics and psychopaths are genuinely and seriously mentally ill.

Speculative and junk science is used to shield homosexuality from public criticism and "prove" the party line that homosexuality is not a disorder, like the gay-gene theory, which is not only highly unlikely but fails to disprove the idea that homosexuality is a disorder but fails to take into consideration that Down syndrome and schizophrenia are both legitimate, serious mental disorders that have genetic causes.

The reason that homosexuality cannot be simply a "sexual orientation" is that it has other effects on a person's bodily appearance, thought, and behavior. It is more like a spectrum disorder, with an increasing list of symptoms and greater severity of symptoms as the disorder is more clearly and extremely presented in an individual. Therefore, homosexuals that were more normal in their behavior would be on the more mild end of the spectrum whereas skinny boys with puffy, feminine cheeks who wear makeup and talk like very rude women(with distorted voice tones that are similar to women's voice tones) whose chief interests lie in fashion, music, and celebrities would occupy the more extreme end of the scale.

That there are other behavioral and physiological symptoms that are present in homosexuals beyond a simple difference in sexual "orientation", which extend across all cultures, suggests that homosexuality has more in common with common mental illnesses than normal behavior.

[edit on 5-10-2008 by Epinephrine]



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 03:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Epinephrine
 


Homosexuality was declassified as a mental illness by the APA as the result of political pressures, not science or scientific discoveries. There is more than enough information to prove that politics alone, mostly from gay lobbyists, was the deciding factor in changing the APA's stance on homosexuality.

Again I ask for PROOF. The APA has shifted a lot through the years due to thorough studies, including denouncing things they also were more aligned with that they now know are harmful, like electroshock therapy methodas. It is easy for you to claim APA is being political however you present no evidence, and can not denounce or counter the decades of research done by the APA.

How much respect did you really hope to achieve by referencing links to an organization that changed its position on homosexuality completely because of pressure homosexuals themselves?

How much respect do you have to gain by stating lies and having absolutely nothing to back them up? If the APA is really so biased and unfounded and all the research is also then prove it.

So far, no scientific study has proven that homosexuals are "normal",

1. Start posting links for your claims. 2. Science has neither stated homosexuality is normal or not. Science does not have the answers, however when it comes to sexuality scientific study has no definitive say about any sexual oreintation, mental health is involved in such issues always as well, as it is with gay issues, and decades of research involing mental health are valid on this issue. The fact that you shy away from that or try to argue that with no valid sources is because you dislike what the decades of research conclude.

Speculative and junk science is used to shield homosexuality from public criticism and "prove" the party line that homosexuality is not a disorder, like the gay-gene theory, which is not only highly unlikely but fails to disprove the idea that homosexuality is a disorder but fails to take into consideration that Down syndrome and schizophrenia are both legitimate, serious mental disorders that have genetic causes

I’ve asked you more than a dozen times now. Support your claims.
The reason that homosexuality cannot be simply a "sexual orientation" is that it has other effects on a person's bodily appearance, thought, and behavior.

Again you show your lack of knowledge of homosexuality and sexuality in general. Again, support your clains.


[edit on 5-10-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 03:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Epinephrine
 


Again, you keep ignoring when I asked you to:

To prove or support your claims that homosexuality has an adverse affect on children and the claims you have made about what these gay fairy tales entail.

Also I'm still waiting for you to prove or support your statements about gay men especially and their opinions toward bisexuality.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Epinephrine

The reason that homosexuality cannot be simply a "sexual orientation" is that it has other effects on a person's bodily appearance, thought, and behavior. It is more like a spectrum disorder, with an increasing list of symptoms and greater severity of symptoms as the disorder is more clearly and extremely presented in an individual. Therefore, homosexuals that were more normal in their behavior would be on the more mild end of the spectrum whereas skinny boys with puffy, feminine cheeks who wear makeup and talk like very rude women(with distorted voice tones that are similar to women's voice tones) whose chief interests lie in fashion, music, and celebrities would occupy the more extreme end of the scale.

[edit on 5-10-2008 by Epinephrine]



You just made my day


How wrong you are...how wrong.

At my school there was a person who fit EVERY part of your list for being homosexual... he was indeed heterosexual. Which annoyingly surprised alot of my friends. And yes... that includes make-up at times.

And to flip it the other way as well, one of my friends is very homophobic...he recently stopped liking a person who he has been friends with as he came out as being homosexual. He fit NONE of your list.

There is no way to tell a gay person apart from a straight person, I would guess that around half of the people YOu would immediately see as gay are actually straight.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Sources backing points made cited:

Australian study linking homosexuality(and specific gay practices) to recreational drug use:
gateway.nlm.nih.gov...
www.narth.com...

Visible behavioral differences between straight and gay men and women:
www.msnbc.msn.com...
www.narth.com...

Homosexuality and mental health problems
cat.inist.fr...
www.narth.com...

Study by Robert Spitzer, who played a role in declassifying homosexuality as a mental illness, showing changes in sexual orientation by people trying to change their sexuality.
www.narth.com...

Maybe we can edit the gay fairy tale to reflect reality a bit more and have Prince1 deal with a crystal meth addiction that causes him to be paranoid and acquire an STI which he passes on to prince2, who commits suicide after the two princes' eventual breakup after a short and rocky relationship.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by StevenDye
 


Obviously, your one antecedent and your use of the phrase "You're wrong" proves me and the collective antecedents from cultures across the world "wrong". I understand that the political debates are on right now but I would hope that we could stop trying to debate like our prominent politicians do, i.e. "I'm right. He's wrong."



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Epinephrine
 


Australian study linking homosexuality(and specific gay practices) to recreational drug use

You do know that the same statistics exist in certain racial and ethnic groups right? Does that mean all people from those groups are the same, are abnormal, or are flawed? Nope. Does that mean there is something wrong with the group and not the person themselves? Nope. I fail to see where those studies support every claim you make about homosexuality, so please go get the pieces and align them with what you said, because it isn’t there.


Homosexuality and mental health problems

The survey you cited doesn’t even involve a thousand people while the APA has decades of research all over the world with thousands of people. Show me where this study trumps all of that research?

The other site you cite is “NARTH” the APA discusses the site on their web page actually. NARTH is a biased source, just search: NARTH and corrupt data or bias. NARTH supports psychiatric methods for “curing” homosexuality that the APA has trumped. So show me where this site trumps that research?

Study by Robert Spitzer, who played a role in declassifying homosexuality as a mental illness, showing changes in sexual orientation by people trying to change their sexuality

The study you speak of is over thirty years old, how does that one study trump decades of research, including more recent research done by the APA? What current study shows the numbers seen in this one that trumps the current studies done by the APA?

Maybe we can edit the gay fairy tale to reflect reality a bit more and have Prince1 deal with a crystal meth addiction that causes him to be paranoid and acquire an STI which he passes on to prince2, who commits suicide after the two princes' eventual breakup after a short and rocky relationship.

You don’t even know what the stories entail. You’ve made several claims though and I wish for you to back them up. Also I’d like to see where you get this notion that homosexuality has an adverse affect on children and that learning about it in general will have an adverse affect.

As for one of those websites you cited let me tell you about the research that trumps it since you were evidently too lazy to go read the facts:

Some of these sites try to claim homosexuality is a psychological disorder because it is not the norm. There is no basis for such claims. There are other extreme differing components in the way people think or are attracted whether this is caused by nature or nurture who knows? You are getting stuck on the “cause” trying to avoid your own statements about adversity. Because something in your brain or behavior is not of the norm that does not make it “bad”; it has to have an adverse affect on the person and it has to be able to be “cured”. Both do not exist among homosexuals, you are more likely to be a happy, full functioning adult if you accept your sexuality and you are not able to change your sexuality. Now I’ve given you a site with two links that has decades of research that tackles every notion you have about homosexuality, and you give me NARTH, a thirty year old study that has already been trumped on the first website I gave you, and an article about research done with less than six hundred people is Australia. This entire conversation is a joke; you are grasping desperately to support your claims with out even looking at the accurate research I’ve given you and you won’t even address the original topic of this post and the claims you’ve made about it.


[edit on 5-10-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 01:13 PM
link   
Sounds like someone's feathers are getting a bit ruffled in here. Calm down!!


The topic is about 4 yr olds getting homosexual fairytales at schools. Not about adults and their sexual preferences or data and research on adults sexual preferences or about references to claims of adult sexual preference research.

I think some reference to the subject title should be linked up in here so we can really debate about the issue raised by the thread title...4 yr olds getting gay fairytales in school.

Cheers!!!!



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Epinephrine
 


Some info about NARTH for you (visit apa.org)


From external source:



The American Psychological Association Committee on Lesbian, Gay, & Bisexual Concerns states that therapy to change sexual orientation is rejected by most medical and mental health associations that have taken a position on the topic, on the grounds that it is often damaging to people's well-being. The American Psychiatric Association states that "ethical practitioners refrain from attempts to change individuals' sexual orientation." Major organizations that reject therapy to change sexual orientation include the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Counseling Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Association of School Administrators, the American Federation of Teachers, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Education Association.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 01:21 PM
link   
That's very unfortunate. Now when one proclaims, "man that is so gay" it really will be.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 01:29 PM
link   
This is the plan by the New World Order as population control. More homosexuals = less people reproducing. As time and time goes on, you will see more and more of this. First it was the professor that said "we should teach the pleasures of gay sex to children as young as 5", and now this.

-LS



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 


You mean like the studies showing that black people are more inclined towards violence, are sexually promiscuous, have high rates of sexual infections, and are generally less intelligent than other population groups or the studies that show that people of different races react differently to some medical treatments? Yes, I am familiar with these studies. I do not see any flaw in them just because they aren't PC or go against modern society's mantra "everyone is the same". What you are trying to say by bringing race into the debate says many things: that you have no leg to stand on on the discussion of homosexuality itself, that that you are caught up in passion for the politics of unwavering acceptance that you cannot calmly reason or consider any evidence that suggests otherwise, and that you really have nothing to say but are so intent on trying to prove the position you are arguing against wrong that you are resorting to indirect character attacks targeting those you disagree with(in this case, associating those who disagree with homosexuality with racists and archetypical bigotry).

If an abnormal behavior does not grant especially useful behaviors or cognitive abilities and is associated with a host of unhealthy behaviors, in this case mental illness, drug use, suicide, and physiological disease, then it is surely a disorder. None of the articles that I supplied suggested that homosexuality was an illness simply because it was not the norm. Those that did label it an illness did so on the grounds that it was associated with unhealthy thought patterns and behaviors in excess of changes sexuality.

It is clear that you are arguing because of political passion and not because of any valid interest in the truth or reality. In that case, why continue to argue(since this is surely not a proper debate)? Your mind has already been made up and will not sway despite the evidence offered and since all you have done to support your position is use impassioned repetition of liberal catchphrases and stating that I'm wrong as if this were self-evidencing fact, I think can find half a million things to do than argue with a young liberal female who argues that we must accept everyone on the basis that it is simply wrong to do anything else.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 


One last point here before I go outside to enjoy functional behavior

APA forgets to mention that the therapy that NARTH endorses involves only volunteers who dislike their homosexuality and wish to change it. It is hardly unethical to respect someone enough to not deny someone the ability to make their own choices, unlike anyone who seeks to make the choice for everyone by banning the option altogether.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Epinephrine
 


no leg to stand

Pot calling the kettle black hey?

nothing to say

I’ve given you mountains of research you have yet to counter, who has nothing to say here?

truth or reality

Again mountains of research support my opinion; you still have yet to counter them. Who is living with out truth and avoiding reality here?

APA forgets to mention that the therapy that NARTH endorses involves only volunteers who dislike their homosexuality and wish to change it.

How is that relevant to the fact that their methods have been proven to fail and be harmful?



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join