View Single Post
Old 05-14-2010, 07:30 AM   #124 (permalink)
Idyllic
Psycho
 
Idyllic's Avatar
 
Location: My House
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood View Post
What you're displaying is a typical attitude of those who want to carry on the 'sexual segregation' of males at all cost (and its almost always someone who closely relates with the 'gay' identity, although, I suspect some males who lack natural masuclinity and are dependant on heterosexuality for their 'straight' status, may also have a strong stake in the 'sexual orientation' concept replacing the original 'manhood' concept).

1. First you attack my assertions vehemently.
2. Then you try to belittle the issue by saying this is somehow my personal issue, and the reason why I am raising it here is entirely personal.
3. Then you ask for evidences.
4. When provided by evidences you repeatedly try to ignore them. You try to hide behind what the mainstream western academic and scientific institution propagate.
5. When specifically proven wrong over an issue, and repeatedly so, you leave all of a sudden. But not gracefully after accepting defeat, but only after levelling all kinds of accusations.
But isn't this precisely what YOU are doing NM, just not the leaving part. I will be self indulgent here by reiterating my post at 120 so as those who only backread 2 or 3 posts get an idea of this so called "debate" and your not-so-intellectually progressive "teachings."

"not-so-intellectually progressive" Of course this is just my opinion based on my experiences and education in life, NM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood View Post
In the wild, males and females interact very superficially and live in separate male and female spaces.
Not entirely, and not all species, you make grand general assumptions that are only supported by antiquated scientist who were known to be bias re: sexuality in animals, not to mention you ARE talking about “IN THE WILD” this is why humans have been able to progress as a species in so much that we dominate the earth and all animals upon it, we are not “the wild.”

A “wild” animals natural instinct to mate with a female is so strong that they are DRIVEN to procreate with a female to the extent of fighting to the death for that pleasure, and in the absence of a female they will have sex with another male, or object, be it animate or not, (thank God for testosterone!!!), merely because it just feels so damn good, doesn’t change the fact that the base animal instinct is procreative sex, note the existence and evolution of LIFE. Homosexuality is not an unnatural occurrence, the concept of love is universal between the sexes, both opposite sex and same sex love….. However, the reality of your argument is misplaced in the uncommon, it is not a given normal for ALL males of a species to inherently prefer other males, in species that wish to survive and evolve, that is……

In the wild, did you even consider that male on male sex is a form of practice and game playing among young animals that cannot defeat the superior strength and wisdom of the older animals and are not permitted to mate with the female anyway? You do recognize that animals fight to the death for the right to inseminate the female.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood View Post
Most of the mating is done by a small percentage of males, roughly 15%. Males mate only during the reproductive season, and leave the female alone, the rest of the time. Most of the other males who mate do it only towards the latter part of their adulthood. An average male elephant who lives till about 50years, if he does so, mates at the age of roughly 45 years.
Only the strongest get to mate with the females NM, only the top 15% are the strongest….. Hello, I would think given the opportunity without the fear of being killed by a stronger male or a female who will attempt to not mate with an inferior strength male as typically females in the wild “know” that genetically the stronger males create stronger offspring, biological fact based in observation of the evolution of species in general, you have heard of Darwin, haven’t you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood View Post
In some species, the 15% males who mate more regularly, create their harems, where a pair of males control upto 20 females in a 'pride.' These males by no account are exclusively 'heterosexual.' They have prides only peirodically, spending their youth in 'male spaces,' forming sexual bonds with other males. And they keep going back to these 'male spaces' throughout their lives. Furthermore, these males do not form 'emotional bonds' with the females in their pride and their is not 'coupling' as found amongst males, nor as between human males and females in the West.
Sounds like big cat facts, I like big cats, but male and female humans are not felines.

Again, the strongest 15% rule the harems, maybe they use sex as a way of intimidating the other males, maybe they just enjoy sex with the other males, but in the end they come back to the females to procreate, and maybe the reason they do not STAY with the females is because the females don’t want them around as they have a tendency to EAT their young!!! Do you just read things that fulfill your own ignorance or what, I mean I can see relationships between men as more that just sexual, as loving and cohesive in society but your insidious proposal that ALL men predominately prefer to have sex with other men is just WRONG.

If the base natural desire in animals, was for predominately male on male sex from the beginning of history, there would be NO HISTROY, or her story. There would be no animals at all. Look around you, beyond your own box, the world is full of life, and yet you would deny the natural proclivities of male/female “heterosexual” sex as evidenced in these amassed populations of all things that evolve and progress on this earth.

One thought, China has a one child law, and yet their couples marry and have sex and stay together male and female, I would think in a country of so many, had your concepts of sexual preference been a reality, they would not be dealing with the overpopulation issues that already exist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood View Post
According to various documented evidences compiled by biologists like Bruce Bagemihl, Paul Vase, Johann Roughgarden, etc., the only males with an exclusive 'heterosexual' orientation are the transgender ones, the effeminate ones. These males are very rare. They don't fight for mating with females, but rather, they form relationships with females and bond with them and raise their kids, often, the kids are not their own, since they don't compete with the other males. Examples of these can be found in red foxes. In sheep, the only males with a heterosexual orientation are the transgendered ones who live with the female group as females, rather than in the male group (source: "Johann Roughgarden's Evolution's Rainbow: Diversity, Gender and Sexuality in Nature and People"). According to a programme on Discovery Channel, there is a rare kind of males amongst Sea Lions who doesn't fight for females like other males who want to mate, but rather, quietly picks out a female with whom he bonds in a male-male like fashion, away from the maddening crowd, and comes back to the same female every reproductive season.
RARE nm, you said it yourself, again, most females kick the males out as they have a tendency to eat the offspring, or in Sea Lions’ cases, crush, especially the offspring of another male, by doing this the males force the female back into heat so he may mate with her again and/or to procreate his own offspring in the other males place. Sometimes they will kill their own offspring, few animals, outside of primates (and HUMANS), play sex games for mere pleasure alone, it is mostly about procreation and dominance (though it is not outside the norm for animals to just have sex), and I seriously doubt the animals are sitting around worrying about who is more “manly.” RARE males amongst sea lions as to imply only a few of them, NM!

NM, very rarely are male species in the animal kingdoms allowed to stay within the female groups simply because the males tend to be so randy (testosterone induced at male puberty, gets you kicked out) in their amorous expressions with the females. It is known that some male species will actually kill the offspring of other males and/or their own merely to force the female back into heat where she is more receptive to have sex.

The male species can be cantankerous inside confined relationships (true, so can females) in the wild animal kingdoms rarely do long term heterosexual relationships exist (outside of some penguins and birds, etc…), However, it would be hard to have a long term hetero relationship when you are constantly having to fight the next “big” dick on the block for your mate, it is much easier and safer to inseminate the female and then go somewhere away from the fray of testosterone driven procreation in the male species of wild animals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood View Post
Among elephants, such a male has a tough time, since the females don't accept any males in their group, transgendered or not. So, such 'heterosexual' males, who don't want to live in male spaces, spend their life alone.
Thus it is natural for the heterosexual males to be differentiated from the 'male space' -- not the male who wants to bond with other males. Western concept of 'sexual orientation' does exactly the opposite. If you have to separate someone into a 'separate' category (esp of effeminate males), separate the ones with no sexuality towards males. You do exactly the opposite of nature, and thus create adverse circumstances and stressful lives for men.
Again, the matriarchal female of the elephant herd will push the “matured/reached puberty” male elephants out of the herd because they get to randy and they typically do not make good “parental” decisions when it comes to the babies of the herd, females can be very protective when it comes to the herds offspring. Most (but not all) male animals in the wild do not take to parenting well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood View Post
I challenge you, or anyone else here, to dig out any mammalian species where 'heterosexual orientation' characterize male sexuality, rather than an instinct to bond sexually with other males.
hmmmmm lets see; cats, dogs, horses, humans, ah, everything that is still evolving through mammalian birth, can you really be this closed minded, r e a l l y? Or maybe you think these animals are smart enough to tell each other, “yeah you big dumb dog, your not supposed to want to hump that female dog over their, no your supposed to want to hump that male dog over yonder, even though that female dogs’ “in heat” dripping vagina smells like the most incredible thing you’ve ever smelt in your life and your drooling to have her and your willing to kill me (another male dog) and any babies that get in your way, man your one dumb dog”…… I’m thinking most dogs that don’t like to procreate with females dogs reduce their own evolutionary involvement in the world…… This isn’t to say they don’t have sex with each other; it’s just that given an opportunity, they would take the bitch.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood View Post
Only the real whores would call themselves 'heterosexual women'.

So, can you see what exactly happened with men? Would you expect men to go and embrace their sexual desire for men and to acknowledge it publicly, and then be labelled as 'homosexual' which is actually 'feminine male whore'? The only people who can be expected to own up their sexuality for men would be the effeminate, promiscuous males, who're addicted to receptive anal sex -- and that is exactly what is happening today.

Nothing better to make insensitive, bigoted women to understand this, than the 'whore' vs 'homo' analogy.
Yeah, Yeah, I'm a whore...... So what’s it to you, I’m not ashamed of a word, and I’m not scared of your innuendo. I told you women in the west know what men like you think of us, it’s blatant in your words, and I could care less what YOU think of me. NM, I don’t just like sex, I LOVE SEX with MEN, real men, not your brand of homophobic, gynophobic, backward thinking bigoted, male chauvinistic, self glorifying rhetoric spewing ball carriers such as yourself, does not a “man” make, and you, NM, most definitely are not a male I would consider worthy of my time, I’m sure your relieved.

NM, if being labeled a whore means I like sex with men, give me a frigging sign, I'd march the capital with my "I'm a WHORE" sign if it meant assuring your type of demoralizing mentality dies at my feet so my sons and other young men AND women can grow up without the likes of your perverted "teachings".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood View Post
So, now you understand that ascribing a separate 'sexual orientation' actually tantamounts to "judging them".
Calling me a whore is not a judgment (as you already assume I am simply because I’m a western woman), Calling me a “bad” whore, now that would be a judgment as you wouldn’t know. But I can honestly say, without judging you personally that you, ‘sir’ appear to be one of the worse “teacher’s” I’ve even had the displeasure to hear rant. But I’ll still listen so as to understand exactly how to prepare my sons to deal with “men” like you and be able to teach them NOT to drink the kind of societal arsenic that’s pouring out of your mouth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood View Post
Also, what I have asserted here has not been previously put together exactly in this way at one place.
That’s because no true scientific scholar would dare desecrate the advancements of society as you are attempting to do with your simplistic and immature, homophobic, anti-effeminate, pro-segregation views of reality. If you can’t find a scholar who has come to these same conclusions, as you erroneously have NM, doesn’t that say something, or do you truly believe that YOU are creating some NEW profound perspectives’ on reality…..

Your thinking is nothing new; it’s just another replication of antiquated conceited, male chauvinistic, self indulgences that have proven to do nothing more than hurt any individuals who buy this kind of societal segregating crap.

This is all about you making a name for yourself as some kind of guru of social equality based on your own skewed views of history where you pick apart logic and attempt to destroy the foundations of sexual freedom because it does not support your interests in perpetuating male superiority, and not just any kind of male superiority, YOUR kind, wherein men are free to control all they purvey via sexual actions alone, using sex as an excuse to support your own brand of masculinity and “hazingish” indoctrinations into manhood.

Your base argument is that ALL “real” men desire a “space” where they can create a social bond with other men, that is completely devoid of “gay” men and women, in general, but that these “real” men ALL also desire to have penetrating sex with other men too, this is your additional definition of a “real” man, going on to add that ALL those men who receive penetration are not part of the “real” man space, regardless of their intrinsic personalities, they are a part of the effeminate male-she gender and should be separated from the space of the “real” man altogether, as should woman.

The “real” man, as YOU define it, is a man who does not enjoy sexual intercourse with women at all, outside of the needs to procreate and that procreation alone is significant enough to prove manhood, whereas masculinity is simply proven by one mans ability to love another man without any sexual receptive penetrations….. This is not based in logic. Two men can love each other, to the complete exclusion of others (2nd & 3rd genders), and live together in their specially created “masculine/real” man “space”, but the minute one of them permits receptive penetration they are no longer a part of your men’s “space”, eventually you will be a lonely, lonely man, NM.

NM, the west is merely a grown up east, humanity began in the east, man evolved in the east, the oldest know human remains are found in the east…… the west was and is a natural progression from the confining mentality that much of eastern thinking still clings too. The west represents not only personal freedoms by social freedoms, I know this must seem scary to you, and somehow you have come to view a free society as destroying to males masculinity or manhood, you couldn’t be farther from the truth, it is in the west where your form of “male” space already exists.

This is why we are so dumbfounded by your argument, because we have already begun to achieve what you seek WITHOUT the necessity of penalizing those who disagree with your views, (whereas you penalize all that is “anti-man” as you deem it, whatever that is, as you can neither define it or even describe it with any intelligent non-subjugational thought), we simply call it personal freedom and continue to progress.

Why do you hate us so much….. we are simply the children of the east all grown up, you come across as hating humanity in the west, as a parent who is so steeped in their own tradition and dogma might hate their own child, that they can’t see the positive future this progression and equality offer them, and when they do glimpse it, they are so afraid of it’s powerful freedom, they crawl back into their antiquated beds and deny it’s very existence or attempt to destroy it, with their jealous undertones as a lullaby in the background. I hope all your young people WAKE UP before you smother them to death with your “real” man brand of controlling, confining and eventually condemning “love.”

I don’t care if you call me a whore…. so what, it’s merely a word you use to try and pigeon hole me or make me feel “bad” for loving sex, especially sex with men, so. If that is what I must be labeled to enjoy my life, so be it, I’m not immune to some of societies more narrow thinkers, I’m just not a party to them, nor do I let them crash my party in life.

Let me explain a little to you about western women, we will take whatever label you give us and use it to promote progressive thinking in our culture, not just for ourselves, but for our children so as they may be free from the stigma of negativities’ that others would force upon them in a means to control their futures.

I wonder if part of the easts’ problem is that you have silenced your mothers, you have removed the ability for your women to have a voice in the creation of mankind’s social evolution, in the end, NM you have no one to protect you whose motives are truly just LOVE…….

I am so sorry for that part of your culture and that those teachings dictate that your children grow up without the strength of that love and that push for education to learn more about the general kindness that dwells within the base effeminate mentality. Peace be with you NM, I hope you find your freedom, as we all desire, just not at the expense of others freedoms. I believe a “real” man would at least TRY to find another way to express sexual reality within a society, one that does not perpetuate inequality as a means to self-promote their own brand of social importance and superiority.

p.s. in the west, we see not only experience as maturity, we also see education as not only a maturing factor, but a factor of true intellectual advancements and progressive realistic thought. The_Dunedan’s degrees don’t merely just expose your intellectual immaturity; they completely BLOW YOU OUT OF THE WATER. You aren’t even in the arena of social acceptance and intelligence as an education like his would denote, hell NM, you haven't even made it into the parking lot.

Your true cause is lost here because it is anti-social and anti-progressive, as well as just plain anti-humane altogether.
__________________
you can tell them all you want but it won't matter until they think it does

p.s. I contradict my contradictions, with or without intention, sometimes.

Last edited by Idyllic; 05-14-2010 at 10:59 AM.. Reason: Missed including a quote.... spelling etc... no suprises, more basic grammar bs. i know, i know,
Idyllic is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360