Quote:
Originally Posted by Idyllic
it’s still o.k. if it allows men who penetrate to remain in the ‘real” men 1st gender regardless of the “homosexual” act which really isn’t “homosexual” because men are supposed to penetrate and it doesn’t matter what hole they penetrate, they are not “gay” or 3rd gender unless they are receivers, or they act or appear effeminate.
Quote:
|
Have I ever said that? NO!! Can you pick out the specific text where I say that!
|
Yes NM you have really said that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
This shows how little you know about male gender and sexuality.
Penetrating is the Gender role of the 'men' (the straight male). And being penetrated is the gender role of the 'third genders (the Queer male). Gender roles are artificially fixed by the society.
It's not because a male gets penetrated that he becomes a Queer. It's because, he's queer that he adopts openly the artificial role of being penetrated. While a masculine male that likes to be penetrated would hide it, be ashamed of it, because that is a queer gender role. Masculine males are forced to adopt penetration, whether or not they want to do it.
|
Why would anyone be forced to accept sexual contact they do not want, this is by no means a western idea, it is a wrong idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
You accused the eastern culture of equating 'third gender' with 'homosexuality', when, as you agree, it only equates 'being penetrated' with 'third gender.
|
I said no such thing, I said it doesn’t matter which end of the sexual “dick” you are on, be a giver or receiver if it is the same gender, it is a homosexual act……
What would you call a “straight” “masculine” man who likes for a female to penetrate him with a strap on dildo? Is he a third gender too? And would that be merely because he allows himself to be penetrated, but not by a male, for he is in essence a heterosexual male who just enjoys the sensation of anal penetration? I would not call this man “gay” or effeminate, would you?.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
In fact, I'd also say that the straight spaces in the West should be reoriented to allow for a lot of male femininity that goes well with the predominant male identity.
|
They already do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
Only the extreme, transgendered males of whatever sexual desires, would then need a separate identity, unlike today, when even slight effeminacy with exclusive desires for men wants to make a male long for a separate identity.
|
Why do they need an identity applied to them, can’t they decide their own or if they even want a label and then be accepted for that? Why does your society feel the need to label them? I don’t, do you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
Eastern culture: Third gender = the penetrated; Man = Penetrator
You're saying this means, in Eastern culture: Third gender = Homosexual
|
No, you are saying that, I said that a sexual act does NOT define a person.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
This would make your own definition of Homosexual, as
Homosexual= the penetrated
|
No, a homosexual person is a person who has chosen to accept that moniker to describe their personal sexual preference, they like sex with the same gendered partner. That’s simply their choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
However, you/ your society, still defines Homosexual = any sexual act between males
You're contradicting your own definition.
|
Again, what I said was that it is the act that is defined as a homosexual act, which does not however define the person, it is the persons’ decision to accept themselves as homosexual (if they wish), just because you participate in a homosexual act, does not a homosexual make.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
But, you're not alone. These definitions are ambiguous, because the concept of 'homosexuality' was botched up in a hurry, building upon the same anti-man myths that the eastern society is living under, even today.
|
NM, what is an “anti-man” myth? What is the “anti-man” agenda? Will you ever define this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
Even serious Western scholars do this all the time. Homosexuality is widely used as a synonym for 'being penetrated' and the penetrator is often excluded from the definition. Homosexuality is also widely used by Western serious scholars (esp. the gay ones) as a synonym for transgenderism, even heterosexual transgenderism.
You're pretty messed up there. And the mess is deliberately created.
|
We exclude no-one, penetrator or receiver, same gender sex = a homosexual sex act. As I said, this is a simple term to define a physical sexual act. If you wish to be accepted as a homosexual, that is a personal choice here.
You, however, still insist on removeing choice by labeling the third gender by appearance, that is simply the reality of your argument. Third Gender = any effeminate male and or receiver of homosexual sex acts. And for as much as you try to give them all the glory you attempt to convince me of, you still ostracize them and deny effeminates the option to be “men” in the 1st gender space, even if they want to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
You've so conveniently ignored my post and questions about the 'whore' identity? Would you care to define women who like to indulge with men as promiscuos women or whores? No judgement here, very simple...
|
You’ll find that most women in the west aren’t goaded easily, we are accustomed to being compared to whores by less free cultures, I merely found your comparison so ridiculous as to be not reply worthy, personally, I mean the whole issue here is to “not” define somebody by there sexual act, right.
But, if it helps, whores are persons who typically get paid for sex, both male and female whores exists. I don’t judge them either, and I would never try to ascribe to them a separate gender orientation because of it.
Again, define the becoming mythical “anti-man” agenda.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
Kindly bring here one statement that says that I am against the rights or dignity of the effeminate males..
|
Well, let me try to piece together the vague innuendos of relating the effeminate man, to the female in general which within your society is viewed as a second class citizen, if citizen at all. Oh, and a major player in the “ant-man” agenda, which you still won’t define, but I am guessing it is NOT a beneficial movement of for the “masculine” “straight” men.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
There were three genders in the society. Man, woman and the third gender (those who were partly man and partly woman, including those who were males from the outside and had a feminine identity). Now, the society (wrongly) ascribed receptive anal sex with this group. However, what made them different from other men was not that they desired sex with men, but that they had a woman inside them.
This fact has been misrepresented to suggest that this group of effeminate males who sought promiscuous receptive sex from men, was 'men who like men.' And that the rest of the males (who were masculine and were defined as 'heterosexual,' just didn't feel sexual for other men, or that they all felt sexual for women.
That is what the homosexuals hope the world believes. But, the truth is everyone knows that 'homo' really means effeminate. Even if you're not supposed to say it so clearly. Even gays know that themselves.
|
And effeminacy in general is seen as a weakness in you culture, it is seen as “anti-man” I am beginning to believe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
Here are a few examples:
1. The phrase, "he looks so gay" doesn't really mean, he looks as if he likes men. It means he looks so effeminate.
2. The first time I met 'homosexuals,' I was aghast at the fact that they were so womanlike. They were even wearing dresses and make-up. When I pointed this out to the 'gay' Swedish acquaintance who had taken me there, who himself didn't look effeminate at the outset, told me indignantly, "you're so homophobic." It took me several years and research into the reality of 'sexual orientation' to realise how could not being comfortable with male effeminacy amount to 'homophobia.' Now, I know. I have learned to accept male femininity since then. However, the reality of sexual orientation I found out through personal experience (that it is actually gender orientation) has since been verified by examining western and other cultures, the past and biology as well.
3. When a masculine male is found to be liking men. The first thing that people say is, "but you don't look it." What they mean is, you don't look effeminate.
4. An openly effeminate male who likes men is often said to be "wearing his sexuality on his sleeve," by gays themselves, when he is not actually displaying his sexual feelings for men here, but his effeminacy, through his dress, moves, gait, etc.
5. When you ask someone if he is 'gay,' a masculine gendered male takes it as a statement questioning his manhood. And, in order to resurrect his manhood, the man will immediately display a sexual interest in women, whether he feels it or not. A sexual interest in women is seen as a sign of manhood, while a sexual interest in men is seen as a 'woman inside the male.'
6. The nature and extent of the stigma and stereotypes attached with 'gay' in the modern 'West' is exactly the same as they are with the 'third gender' category in the non-West and in the West before the concept of 'gay' was originated. Why is a gay male stereotyped as an effeminate male? Is it a false stereotype or is it seeped in reality? Where do stereotypes come from? Not from out of air? Why aren't straight males stereotyped as effeminate, when as you yourself rightly pointed out, many males who like women are effeminate?
|
This entire 1 through 6 is just another attempt to discredit and demoralize effeminacy, and both the 2nd and the 3rd gender, as humanistically less viable within the society of the 1st gender man.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
No. Effeminate male behavior is not negative. It's been made into a negative behavior. Male femininity is natural, healthy and desirable, even beautiful trait. Our societies have persecuted male femininity unjustly.
The issue is not negativism of effeminate behavior. Even if effeminate behavior was thought of as positive, there'd still be an issue here.
|
EVEN IF EFFEMINATE BEHAVIOR WAS THOUGHT OF AS POSITIVE, THERE”D STILL BE AN ISSUE HERE, what issue NM?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
The issue here is of understanding that males can only be divided naturally into two categories: Males with a male identity, and males with a female identity. Sexual or any other preferences of any kind cannot be a ground for dividing men from men. Masculine males have a direct affinity with each other, and so do effeminate males with each other. Masculine males tend to unite, band and bond together, while feminine males tend to unite, band and bond together, irrespective of sexual, or food or film preferences.
|
The issue here is WHY divide males to begin with??????? This division alone implies the lesser value of one, specifically when the one is compared to the devalued effeminate nature.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
The thing to realise is that, the concept of 'sexual orientation' is just a politics to propagate and stigmatize 'sexual desire for men' as 'effeminate' by redefining the two biological male categories of "masculine gendered" and "feminine gendered" males in terms of 'heterosexuality' and 'homosexuality' respectively.
It's not that male effeminacy is bad. It's just that building a 'man liking man' identity on the 'effeminate male' identity is wrong. It's mixing of trait. Its mixing of issues. It suits only a few males who fit into this narrow confused space. And those who want to see sexuality between males stigmatize -- and these does include some women. Because, heterosexualization of straight men and their spaces, does invest a lot of power with women. And who hates power, especially if it comes easy.
|
“Women, who hates power, especially when it comes easily”….. wake up NM, what power do women have, especially in your culture where all effeminacy is debased and demoralized to begin with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
The concept of sexual orientation suits only a particular class of males who like men, who are different from other men, not on account of their sexuality for men, but on account of their gender orientation. I have done immense work with whom the gays call 'straight' males, and its a fact that 'straights' do not have a problem understanding this, Its only the gays, being too seeped in the 'gay ideology' that they don't want to see anything else. Unless gays take off their tainted glasses they won't see the world for what it actually is.
|
Gays and their “tainted glasses”. Whatever, but it sound bigoted to me.
Quote:
|
Wrong assumptions: The very assumptions that the concept of sexual orientation is based on is wrong. Its based on the invalid assumption that "most men are primarily attracted to women." and only a small percentage of men ever have a sexuality for men. Another wrong assumption is that the default sexuality of men is towards women, and sexuality for men happens as an anomaly.
|
It is noted that 1 in 10 to 1 in 20 males in the world self profess homosexuality as a gender preference, that means 9 men in 10 to 19 men in 20 are primarily attracted to females, at least this holds true in culture where healthy non-degraded and non-stigmatized relationships with women are viewed as normal in men and not a weakness.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
It's also based on the wrong assumption that males who like men do so because they have a female soul/ biology inside them. In fact, it is this and this assumption alone that makes plausible the making of a separate category for homosexuality. In fact, the entire concept of homosexuality was constructed keeping in mind an invalid representative group -- of intermediate sexes, of females inside male bodies, who indulged in lustful sexual behavior with men, treating their anuses like vaginas.
|
It is you who degrade not only “gay” man but women also. I mean it would be easy for me to look at you as a total loser for assuming that men who like to penetrate others view a man ass hole as the equivalent of my vagina, why don’t you non-gay masculine penetrators, go bear your offspring in the 3rd genders ass, as it is just another vagina, right. Your entire argument completely devalues the worth of women, but it is blatantly obvious you really don’t care about that.