Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Min
Women want one man to satisfy their every need. Men want every woman to satisfy their one need. World operates on propogation, so therefore, the only man not controlled by woman is they gay man. Though they cannot breed on, they're in a way superior, since they do not have that drive that affects their whole mind.
|
Wow, what a load of stereotypical bullshit. Are you under this strange impression that gay men are less sex obsessed that straight men? Or that women are less sex obsessed than straight men, for that matter? They (females) might go about getting it in a different way and have to deal with the social impact of too much of a good thing, but this idea that women want "one man to satisfy their every need" would be so very humorously 1950s if I didn't think you were serious.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Min
Take in the stereotype of most lesbians being butch bull-dykes. They are such because they have more testosterone.
|
They are such because the girls who don't "look gay" are assumed to be heterosexual.... by both gay and straight people.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Min
Gay males are more effeminate since they have more testosterone.
|
Or because the "manly" gay males are, again, assumed to be heterosexual.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Min
Manly gays do not exist, it is simply a foil for their womanlyness. Effeminate lesbians do not exist either, since they can only foil as such to get other females to talk to them. In this case, while their gonads are still their, their pheromone reception is off on some level, at a genetic base. Genetics determine orienation, quod est demonstradtum.
|
Have you ever had a friend who was gay? Even known a gay person on more than a "office acquaintance" type level even if you wouldn't call them a friend? Have you even met a gay person? You seem to be confusing phenotype and genotype, BTW, making the unsupported assertion that A=B and backing it up with unsupported assertion B=A doesn't get you to QED.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Min
However, women have one-upped men again. Two men cannot produce offspring. Two women can. The purspose of the embryo is firstly a supply of the womens genes, and secondary is to provide a nourishment source before the egg embeds in a placenta. It also serves as a source of food until the baby is mature enough to have fully connected to the placenta by an umbilical cord.
|
The egg does not embed in the placenta. An ball of about a hundred cells embeds in the wall of the uterus. It then forms a hollow ball shape called a blastocyst. The ball then creases to form a hollow within the ball. The hollow within the ball will eventually form the fetus. The outer section of the ball develops into the placenta. The connection between them becomes the umbilical cord.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Min
Two sperm have the genetic material to provide a viable child, but not the food source, so it has no actual ability to survive the hurdle of attachment to the placenta itself. Two women, however, not only have the genetic information to provide a child(though it may only be female), but it has the nourishment to get that baby through the first stages. Through science being able to extract nucleii froms cells and transfer them to others, they have come up with this method of two females being able to reproduce. This may even get to the point where one woman can take two of her own eggs, and make a child on her own. Women > Men.
|
You seem to think that human ova carry a "yolk" upon which the embryo feeds. You are incorrect in this belief. It is true, though, that ova come with a supply of mitochondria while sperm cells do not.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Min
In ye olde times, such as the 1500-1600's of England, it's noticeable that women who were sought out were buxom, rounded, and qith quite hefty set hips. Why?
|
Because being fat in that particular way meant you could afford an excess of food and idleness. Thus indicating that you were rich. Kind of like the current favoring of people that can afford personal trainers and gym memberships and actually have enough time and energy to work out and lay in the sun getting a tan afterwards. Kind of like how previously it was favored if you had pale skin indicating that you didn't work out in the fields under the sun.... because, again, you had enough money to not have to do it.
Die in a fire.
