Quote: (12-03-2013 02:25 PM)reaper23 Wrote:  

If a straight society with built in gay shaming as we have had here forever can't effectively coerce all gay people into being straight why do you think a gay accepting society will coerce straight people into being gay?

Who said anything about coercing gay people into being straight?

Quote: (12-03-2013 03:30 PM)NY Digital Wrote:  

Quote: (12-03-2013 02:25 PM)reaper23 Wrote:  

If a straight society with built in gay shaming as we have had here forever can't effectively coerce all gay people into being straight why do you think a gay accepting society will coerce straight people into being gay?

Who said anything about coercing gay people into being straight?

Well, the republican party and conservatives turn straight people into gay.

Right?

Gay shaming has kept people in the closet for years. You don't even realize it because it's part of the system.

If gays are stuck in the closet because of gay shaming are fat people stuck in the refrigerator because of fat shaming?

Quote: (12-03-2013 12:20 PM)reaper23 Wrote:  

the homophobia expressed on this thread is alarming to me.

A knowledge of history -- and the results of homosexuals in charge of a nation -- would alarm you even more. History is a great teacher.

Read "The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party"

http://www.amazon.com/The-Pink-Swastika-...0964760932

Here is an excerpt regarding Ernst Roehm, who was a co-equal with Hitler until Hitler had him assassinated:

Quote:Quote:

The favorite meeting place of the SA was a “gay” bar in Munich called the Bratwurstgloeckl where Roehm kept a reserved table (Hohne:82). This was the same tavern where some of the early meetings of the Nazi Party had been held (Rector:69). At the Bratwurstgloeckl, Roehm and associates — Edmund Heines, Karl Ernst, Ernst’s partner Captain [Paul] Rohrbein, Captain Petersdorf, Count Ernst Helldorf — would meet to plan and strategize. These were the men who orchestrated the Nazi campaign of intimidation and terror. All of them were homosexual (Heiden, 1944:371).

Indeed, homosexuality was all that qualified many of these men for their positions in the SA. Heinrich Himmler would later complain of this: “Does it not constitute a danger to the Nazi movement if it can be said that Nazi leaders are chosen for sexual reasons?” (Gallo:68). Himmler was not so much opposed to homosexuality itself as to the fact that non-qualified people were given high rank based on their homosexual relations with Roehm and others. For example, SA Obergruppenfuehrer (Lieutenant General) Karl Ernst, a militant homosexual, had been a hotel doorman and a waiter before joining the SA. “Karl Ernst is not yet thirty-five, writes Gallo, he commands 250,000 men...he is simply a sadist, a common thug, transformed into a responsible official” (ibid.:50f). Later, Ernst became a member of the German Parliament (Machtan:185). Gallo writes,

"Roehm, as the head of 2,500,000 Storm Troops had surrounded himself with a staff of perverts. His chiefs, men of rank of Gruppenfuehrer or Obergruppenfuehrer, commanding units of several hundred thousand Storm Troopers, were almost without exception homosexuals. Indeed, unless a Storm Troop officer were homosexual he had no chance of advancement” (Knickerbocker:55).

http://www.defendthefamily.com/pfrc/book..._final.htm

There's a big difference between homosexual and 'gay' I think. I mentioned Jack Donovan earlier, and I'll mention his name again for clarity in what I mean. Homosexual men like him are a lot different to the ridiculous gay diva bullshit:






In Britain, it appears to be class-based. The more middle class/intelligent a gay person is, the less likely they are to have the effeminate affected speech etc. At least that's what I've noticed.

Quote: (12-04-2013 03:54 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

Quote: (12-03-2013 12:20 PM)reaper23 Wrote:  

the homophobia expressed on this thread is alarming to me.

A knowledge of history -- and the results of homosexuals in charge of a nation -- would alarm you even more. History is a great teacher.

Read "The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party"

http://www.amazon.com/The-Pink-Swastika-...0964760932

Here is an excerpt regarding Ernst Roehm, who was a co-equal with Hitler until Hitler had him assassinated:

Quote:Quote:

The favorite meeting place of the SA was a “gay” bar in Munich called the Bratwurstgloeckl where Roehm kept a reserved table (Hohne:82). This was the same tavern where some of the early meetings of the Nazi Party had been held (Rector:69). At the Bratwurstgloeckl, Roehm and associates — Edmund Heines, Karl Ernst, Ernst’s partner Captain [Paul] Rohrbein, Captain Petersdorf, Count Ernst Helldorf — would meet to plan and strategize. These were the men who orchestrated the Nazi campaign of intimidation and terror. All of them were homosexual (Heiden, 1944:371).

Indeed, homosexuality was all that qualified many of these men for their positions in the SA. Heinrich Himmler would later complain of this: “Does it not constitute a danger to the Nazi movement if it can be said that Nazi leaders are chosen for sexual reasons?” (Gallo:68). Himmler was not so much opposed to homosexuality itself as to the fact that non-qualified people were given high rank based on their homosexual relations with Roehm and others. For example, SA Obergruppenfuehrer (Lieutenant General) Karl Ernst, a militant homosexual, had been a hotel doorman and a waiter before joining the SA. “Karl Ernst is not yet thirty-five, writes Gallo, he commands 250,000 men...he is simply a sadist, a common thug, transformed into a responsible official” (ibid.:50f). Later, Ernst became a member of the German Parliament (Machtan:185). Gallo writes,

"Roehm, as the head of 2,500,000 Storm Troops had surrounded himself with a staff of perverts. His chiefs, men of rank of Gruppenfuehrer or Obergruppenfuehrer, commanding units of several hundred thousand Storm Troopers, were almost without exception homosexuals. Indeed, unless a Storm Troop officer were homosexual he had no chance of advancement” (Knickerbocker:55).

http://www.defendthefamily.com/pfrc/book..._final.htm

While this is very interesting and I didn't know about that, it also seems that Hitler had all of these people murdered in a coup (Night of the Long Knives). Not because they were homosexual, but because they mildly criticized him and posed too much of a threat. I don't think they made it to leadership of the Third Reich. But still, fascinating data.

Quote: (12-03-2013 05:24 PM)Wutang Wrote:  

If gays are stuck in the closet because of gay shaming are fat people stuck in the refrigerator because of fat shaming?

ha ha

Tragically no, but it's a good concept!

Maybe obesely fat people should just be interned in a labor camp doing some kind of social service work (like breaking boulders or something that gets them to exercise). Just until they slim down enough to be normal, productive members of society (and not massive healtcare burdens)...just a thought...))

Quote: (12-03-2013 03:36 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  

Quote: (12-03-2013 03:30 PM)NY Digital Wrote:  

Quote: (12-03-2013 02:25 PM)reaper23 Wrote:  

If a straight society with built in gay shaming as we have had here forever can't effectively coerce all gay people into being straight why do you think a gay accepting society will coerce straight people into being gay?

Who said anything about coercing gay people into being straight?

Well, the republican party and conservatives turn straight people into gay.

Right?

It certainly can seem that way from time to time...just look at Lindsey Graham...

Quote: (12-03-2013 01:12 AM)Matt Forney Wrote:  

To everyone who's in favor of more gay men because you think that it'll mean less competition to get laid, you're neglecting a crucial problem with this:

Gay men are one of the biggest reasons why American women are fat, bitchy and slutty.

Have you seen how gays interact with their "fag hag" friends? They reinforce every single negative behavior that girls engage in. Sluttiness? Gays are fully on-board with slut pride, and even those that aren't don't see anything wrong with sleeping around because they do it (on average, homosexual men outpace lesbians, straight men and women exponentially when it comes to partner count). Bitchiness? Gays will encourage it with you-go-grrlisms. Fattiness? There are some exceptions, but it's mostly the same deal. The worst part is that since they're gay, they'll never be confronted with the consequences of their actions.

You may think that the minuscule percentage of gay men makes their ability to poison the female well limited, but you're forgetting how susceptible girls are to media manipulation. Twenty some-odd years of propaganda (shows like Will and Grace etc.) have made having a gay friend cool and hip, something to aspire to, while wallpapering over the negative aspects of mass homosexuality (HIV and venereal disease, mental illness etc.). American girls, or at least girls in urban areas, idolize gay men and regard them as founts of wisdom. In fact, you could make the argument that gay men are worse for girls than straight white knights, because the latter are low-status losers trying for a pity fuck while the former have been lionized by the mainstream media.

Gay men represent the best of both worlds for girls: a white knight who will shore up her ego yet has no sexual interest in her.

So if the percentage of gay men rises, you will find it easier to score... with girls who are slovenly, unpleasant to be around, and have seen more cock than a rooster farm. I'll think I'll pass.

You could also argue that many gays are fighting the good fight on this front. Gays are notoriously bitchy and judgmental and they love to fat-shame. Remember- gays control the fashion industry (designers, photographers, stylsits, etc.) and they're not into relaxing female beauty standards at all. The CEO of Abercrombie, who is a huge queen, got in hot water for saying that their clothes are not meant for fat people. Maybe some gays have fag-hag orbiters, but the vast majority I've seen are quick to make fun of a sloppily-dressed, ugly woman.

My university had a gay acting teacher who always had girls in tears because he'd tell them to lose weight or be blunt about them not being pretty enough to make it in show business.

Also, I've heard a middle aged gay man complaining about the rampant entitlement and bitchy attitudes of young American women.

All that is to say that straight women and gays aren't necessarily bedfellows.

Quote: (12-04-2013 07:25 AM)Teedub Wrote:  

There's a big difference between homosexual and 'gay' I think. I mentioned Jack Donovan earlier, and I'll mention his name again for clarity in what I mean. Homosexual men like him are a lot different to the ridiculous gay diva bullshit:

That was the exact cause of the rift in the homosexual community in Nazi Germany that caused the butches, who acquired political power in the Nazi Party, to send the fems to the concentration camps. The butches absolutely reviled the fems.

Quote:Quote:

The authors do not wish to imply that all homosexuals fall into one or the other of these two simplistic stereotypes. The terms “Butch” and “Fem” in this study are used loosely to differentiate between two ideological extremes relating to the nature of homosexual identity.

Generally in this work the German “Fems” are defined as homosexual men who acted like women. They were pacifists and accomodationists. Their goals were equality with heterosexuals and the “right to privacy,” and generally they opposed sex with young children. Their leaders were Karl Heinrich Ulrichs and Magnus Hirschfeld.

The “Butches,” on the other hand, were masculine homosexuals. They were militarists and chauvinists in the Hellenic mold. Their goal was to revive the pederastic military cults of pre-Christian pagan cultures, specifically the Greek warrior cult. They were often vicious misogynists and sadists. Their leaders included Adolf Brand and Ernst Roehm.

The “Butches” reviled all things feminine. Their ideal society was the Maennerbund, an all-male “comradeship-in-arms” comprised of rugged men and boys (Oosterhuis and Kennedy:255). In their view, heterosexuals might be tolerated for the purpose of continuing the species, but effeminate homosexuals were considered to be subhuman, and thus intolerable.

Most of the estimated 1.2 to 2 million homosexuals in Germany at the time of the Third Reich undoubtedly fit somewhere between the two extremes of the movement. This may explain the fact that less than 2% of this population were prosecuted under anti-sodomy laws by the Nazis (Cory and LeRoy estimate that “Fems” make up 5-15% of male homosexuals. Cory and LeRoy:73). Most of those who were prosecuted can be shown to fit the profile of the “Fems.” Kurt Hiller, a ranking member of the SHC who later succeeded Hirschfeld, “estimated that 75 percent of the male homosexuals sympathized with the parties of the Right” (Johansson in Friedlander:233).

In his introduction to The Men with the Pink Triangle, the supposed testimony of a former pink triangle prisoner at the Flossenburg concentration camp, translator David Fernbach confirms that the “Butch/Fem” conflict was at the heart of the Nazi hatred of the “pink triangles.” He writes,

"Naturally, in the paramilitary organization of the SA, Hitler Youth, etc., even the elite SS, the forms of homosexuality that are characteristic of such all-male bodies were as common as they always are...it was quite fundamental to Nazi ideology that men were to be properly “masculine”...when male homosexuality disguises itself as a cult of “manliness” and virility, it is less obnoxious from the fascist standpoint than is the softening of the gender division that homosexuality invariably involves when it is allowed to express itself freely." (Heger:10f).

http://www.defendthefamily.com/pfrc/book..._final.htm

Quote: (12-04-2013 03:54 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

Quote: (12-03-2013 12:20 PM)reaper23 Wrote:  

the homophobia expressed on this thread is alarming to me.

A knowledge of history -- and the results of homosexuals in charge of a nation -- would alarm you even more. History is a great teacher.

Read "The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party"

http://www.amazon.com/The-Pink-Swastika-...0964760932

Here is an excerpt regarding Ernst Roehm, who was a co-equal with Hitler until Hitler had him assassinated:

Quote:Quote:

The favorite meeting place of the SA was a “gay” bar in Munich called the Bratwurstgloeckl where Roehm kept a reserved table (Hohne:82). This was the same tavern where some of the early meetings of the Nazi Party had been held (Rector:69). At the Bratwurstgloeckl, Roehm and associates — Edmund Heines, Karl Ernst, Ernst’s partner Captain [Paul] Rohrbein, Captain Petersdorf, Count Ernst Helldorf — would meet to plan and strategize. These were the men who orchestrated the Nazi campaign of intimidation and terror. All of them were homosexual (Heiden, 1944:371).

Indeed, homosexuality was all that qualified many of these men for their positions in the SA. Heinrich Himmler would later complain of this: “Does it not constitute a danger to the Nazi movement if it can be said that Nazi leaders are chosen for sexual reasons?” (Gallo:68). Himmler was not so much opposed to homosexuality itself as to the fact that non-qualified people were given high rank based on their homosexual relations with Roehm and others. For example, SA Obergruppenfuehrer (Lieutenant General) Karl Ernst, a militant homosexual, had been a hotel doorman and a waiter before joining the SA. “Karl Ernst is not yet thirty-five, writes Gallo, he commands 250,000 men...he is simply a sadist, a common thug, transformed into a responsible official” (ibid.:50f). Later, Ernst became a member of the German Parliament (Machtan:185). Gallo writes,

"Roehm, as the head of 2,500,000 Storm Troops had surrounded himself with a staff of perverts. His chiefs, men of rank of Gruppenfuehrer or Obergruppenfuehrer, commanding units of several hundred thousand Storm Troopers, were almost without exception homosexuals. Indeed, unless a Storm Troop officer were homosexual he had no chance of advancement” (Knickerbocker:55).

http://www.defendthefamily.com/pfrc/book..._final.htm

As if no heterosexual was ever a tyrant or a murderer.

Quote: (12-03-2013 03:30 PM)NY Digital Wrote:  

Quote: (12-03-2013 02:25 PM)reaper23 Wrote:  

If a straight society with built in gay shaming as we have had here forever can't effectively coerce all gay people into being straight why do you think a gay accepting society will coerce straight people into being gay?

Who said anything about coercing gay people into being straight?

many on this thread are freaking out about homo acceptance into 'regular' culture, ostensibly out of fear that this acceptance will lead to the 'corruption' of children and increase in the rates of homosexuality.

seems to me this gives an awful lot of power to the homosexual agenda that is unwarranted. social pressures aren't enough to change a persons sexuality. it doesnt work currently, under the existing system, which largely shames gays and makes them feel like they 'should' be straight until such a time that their cognitive dissonance is so great they have to come out of the closet.

straight culture can not oppress homosexuality.

why would a gay acceptance culture take otherwise straight people and turn them gay?

this thinking is called homophobia

Quote: (12-05-2013 08:54 AM)reaper23 Wrote:  

Quote: (12-03-2013 03:30 PM)NY Digital Wrote:  

Quote: (12-03-2013 02:25 PM)reaper23 Wrote:  

If a straight society with built in gay shaming as we have had here forever can't effectively coerce all gay people into being straight why do you think a gay accepting society will coerce straight people into being gay?

Who said anything about coercing gay people into being straight?

many on this thread are freaking out about homo acceptance into 'regular' culture, ostensibly out of fear that this acceptance will lead to the 'corruption' of children and increase in the rates of homosexuality.

"many on this thread [...] freaking out [...] ostensibly out of fear [...]" -- These are some serious forum-weasel phrases. Observations, assertions, and predictions are not "freaking out." If you're going to lay down accusations like that, you ought to be more specific.

Quote:Quote:

this thinking is called homophobia

Originally, the word as coined means fear of people thinking you are gay. It has morphed into meaning virtually any assertion, observation, argument, or otherwise articulated idea that is in any way negative about homosexuality. It's then used as a rhetorical bludgeon to replace real argument.

Sorry for the meta-commentary but I think your core arguments are fine to stand on their own, you don't need to rely on trollish or PC shenanigans to make your case.

Quote: (12-05-2013 09:49 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

Quote: (12-05-2013 08:54 AM)reaper23 Wrote:  

Quote: (12-03-2013 03:30 PM)NY Digital Wrote:  

Quote: (12-03-2013 02:25 PM)reaper23 Wrote:  

If a straight society with built in gay shaming as we have had here forever can't effectively coerce all gay people into being straight why do you think a gay accepting society will coerce straight people into being gay?

Who said anything about coercing gay people into being straight?

many on this thread are freaking out about homo acceptance into 'regular' culture, ostensibly out of fear that this acceptance will lead to the 'corruption' of children and increase in the rates of homosexuality.

"many on this thread [...] freaking out [...] ostensibly out of fear [...]" -- These are some serious forum-weasel phrases. Observations, assertions, and predictions are not "freaking out." If you're going to lay down accusations like that, you ought to be more specific.

Quote:Quote:

this thinking is called homophobia

Originally, the word as coined means fear of people thinking you are gay. It has morphed into meaning virtually any assertion, observation, argument, or otherwise articulated idea that is in any way negative about homosexuality. It's then used as a rhetorical bludgeon to replace real argument.

Sorry for the meta-commentary but I think your core arguments are fine to stand on their own, you don't need to rely on trollish or PC shenanigans to make your case.

I'm actually trying to avoid a larger conflict by not addressing people directly.

even if your assertion about the word homophobia is right in that it is used in place of a reasoned argument, i did the exact opposite of that. i made a reasoned argument and used that argument to define what i meant by my usage of homophobia earlier in the thread.

----

Definition of HOMOPHOBIA

: irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals

Quote: (12-05-2013 08:54 AM)reaper23 Wrote:  

many on this thread are freaking out about utterly-bored with homo acceptance into exaltation over 'regular' culture, ostensibly out of fear understanding that this acceptance will lead to the 'corruption' of children and increase in the rates of homosexuality society valuing weakness over strength; victimhood over self-reliance; flamboyant attention whoring over modesty and decorum; and the abnormal over the normal.

Fixed.

Quote: (12-04-2013 07:25 AM)Teedub Wrote:  

In Britain, it appears to be class-based. The more middle class/intelligent a gay person is, the less likely they are to have the effeminate affected speech etc. At least that's what I've noticed.

Stephen Fry would be a notable exception.

In a free country, we should be able to assume that if I am a total jerk and a dickhead and an inconsiderate prick to everybody, then the fact that people don't like me probably has nothing to do with me being a straight man. There is human garbage in every walk of life. By saying that straight men are somehow "the problem" feminists are scapegoating us and deluding themselves, and they'll never know the truth, which is that life is inherently painful and difficult and it is nobody's fault/responsibility but your own and God's.