Advertisements

diaryofanegress

Observations of an Invisible Woman

Is Gay the New Black?

 

 

 

My brother called me the other day and asked me a question. “Why are gays now in alliance with the black struggle? Do you think it’s one and the same? And…if they were NOT gay, would they be so empathetic towards equality?”

WOW! What a question!

So….let me ask all of you. Is the gay struggle akin to the black experience in AmeriKlan? If so, why? If you oppose, why not?

****Since this will be touchy and the comments will probably get brutal, again, all I ask for is a modicum of reverence for gays and lesbians****

Advertisements

Single Post Navigation

75 thoughts on “Is Gay the New Black?

  1. Ron Thomas on said:

    I think the alliance is borne out of simple necessity: We/they need all the allies we/they can get, and as the old adage states, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Alone, the both of us are weakened, but together………….well that an entirely different fight altogether, with multiple fronts to attack, and numbers that can grow exponentially.

    In some ways, the struggle is similar. it’s a fight for rights, justice, and to be treated as a human being; not a “thing” to be ridiculed for someone’s amusement. It’s the same in that it’s a fight to be seen as HUMAN, and afforded the same level of respect due any and all humans, skin color or sexual orientation be damned.

    In other ways, it’s not the same. While there has always been persecution of gays in this country, it has NEVER reached the level of brutality, degradation, and just pure evil Black americans have experienced in our time. Gays have never been relegated to the status of human chattel, never been considered worth less than animals, never been considered subhuman as an entire race, never been subjected to the state-sanctioned attempts at genocide that we still endure; just because of the color of our skin. The struggles gay americans are going through is a relatively recent event time-wise), while the Black struggle for equality has been in full swing since the 1st time we ever crossed path with the White man. In this respect, gay is NOT the new Black, and never will be.

    Now for the $64K question. ” if they were NOT gay, would they be so empathetic towards equality?”

    I do not think so. I think that like most people in the world, if it didn’t involve them in some major & direct way, they’d sit it out.

    Would they sympathize with us? I’m sure they would.

    Would they show solidarity with us if requested? Depends on what’s in it for them.

    Would they be as vocal about our part of the struggle if they weren’t in the same wagon? Probably not.

    That’s just people, and just like the rest of us; if they stood to lose what they already had by involving themselves in a fight that wasn’t really involving them, they might be VERY hesitant to step out there, knowing the cost.

    I’ll step aside now, and cede the floor to someone more eloquent than myself.

  2. mary burrell on said:

    I used to get annoyed when they used to say they used to compare their struggle to ours. But now It’s clear to me we are similar. When people say that this(LGBT). is a choice I disagree with that. Nobody chooses to be marginalized and have violence perpetrated against them. I’m all for the pursuit of happiness for all.

  3. ChazIng on said:

    @ Mary
    If that were the case, do all persons who look European but have African ancestry choose to identify as ‘white’? Choice does not negate the possibility of choosing to be marginalized. Some have even argued that some religious groups use persecution to ‘prove’ that they alone are correct in their theology.

  4. mary burrell on said:

    @Chazing, I meant to say I realize that we are all in the struggle together. I totally agree with you. I was typing fast and my brain was racing. I love everyone. I feel everyone should be happy. I hope this makes sense this time. Peace.

  5. ChazIng on said:

    I think this relies on genetics. Is homosexuality genetic? If it is not, then it should not be associated with groups who have and are suffering racial oppression.

  6. tehnoun on said:

    Well, I do think there is a parallel between the two movements, and I do think an alliance of sorts between them could make them both more formidable, but I tend to not equate them as being totally the same. As Ron said above, while it’s certainly true that we’ve gotten a rough deal in this country, I don’t view the persecution against gays as being anywhere near the same as that against people of color.

    As for whether or not there would still be sympathy if said struggle didn’t affect us… that’s a hard question to answer, bur I admit that Ron is probably right here. Us humans are selfish creatures, after all.

  7. Mickey on said:

    I agree with Ron Thomas. But here’s the catch. The gay movement is similar to the feminist movement in that it is complicated. While feminists say that they are looking for equality between the sexes, feminists of color’s issues are largely ignored as there is a cross-section of issues (i.e., White women dealing with sexism while WOC deal with sexism AND racism simultaneously). Gay White men have discriminated against gay POC, so although gay White men are discriminated against, they still receive mitigated privilege over gay POC and, in some cases, heterosexual POC. Therefore, a gay male POC also has two strikes against them (gay & POC.)

  8. mary burrell on said:

    @Mickey : Great comment, I wish I could have said that.

  9. blackmystory on said:

    Are you people for real? Being African and descendant from the African tree is and never will be the same as having sexual fetish or abnormal sexual desires and intent. Abnormal because man claims he is superior to the animals but the animals know what time it is, better than we do. The only anomaly in the animal kingdom is when animals in ecologically destitute areas, ie, destroyed by man, are so affected by ingesting pollutants through their endocrine and adrenal glands, that they don’t know what the hell they re supposed to do. I have to put that out there to get the animal homosexuality lies and mis-education out of the way. For those who think otherwise research it. But back to the original question. No! it is not the same! Are we so forgetful and dismissive of our Ma’afa , the African holocaust that we are equating every hangers on struggles with ours? The average homosexuals, according to the Caucasian man’s statistics, have more access to education, have more disposable income, better jobs, are more employed and employable, are more politically connected AND enjoy a higher and or better quality of life than the average African people. At the same time, Anti-African hatred runs rampant in the Homosexual community,–I live in Toronto, the alleged second biggest homosexual city in North America and am very much aware of this, both directly and indirectly. Have we forgotten that Africans are the ONLY people to dragged kicking and screaming as prisoners of Imperialist and Colonialist invasion, to the Americas, forced to build this “FREE” nation, and never given freedom? Have we forgotten the Kazaars crying never forget they less than 350, 000 Hitler killed, the cry after 911 of never forget when…well that is another story, but when we ask for reparation they tell us to forget it? Everybody is aligning themselves with us, but us. We are the buffer between the elitist power mongers than run the world, the Asians that come here to screw us over because we are open to it, the other European tribes that come here because they have “white privileged: off our backs, yet we are giving homosexuals a pass? The homosexual movement and our fight for liberation from tyranny in North America is and never will be the same, but it is thought so because in our hurry to go along to get along as complacent cows, instead of being hated for being a people who stands for something…you know like all the heroes and sheroes we cynically celebrate come February every year?

  10. ChazIng on said:

    Agreed, good point Mickey

  11. if gay is the new black, then is black the old black? i dont think so. so nope its not. but i appreciate the move for solidarity. it just needs to be expressed in some other way.

  12. I think both groups have an understanding of what it feels like to be marginalised from mainstream society. However, the way in which both groups are marginalised is completely different. I do think that solidarity/empathy amongst different groups can only be a good thing.

  13. It’s very, very peculiar reading the comments here. It shows how much Europeans continue to dominate the thought processes of even well-read African people. Anyone involved in actual struggle knows that Homosexuals are not oppressed but oppressive. For instance, it’s known that to this day people in politics participate in homosexual relationships. Beyond that, it’s known how many of our African male and female ancestors were raped in Africa, raped on the ships and raped on the plantations. Even further, during lynchings, it’s known that the lynching White men would castrate the African people and put the removed penises into their own mouths. To fathom sympathizing for the very culture that destroyed us seems beyond, beyond me. Excellent resources thereupon are the African Blood Siblings, click my name, and of course, War On the Horizon: http://www.waronthehorizon.com/

  14. The reason behind the claim and even the question, with all due respect to truthbetold’s Brother, is a European Control of the African mind.

    Brown V. Board of Education was not initiated by a will to integrate. Black people were happy with our own separated schools. Black intellectuals akin to the NAACP, an integrationist outfit, willed for ‘equality’ (or the promotion of “Coloured” people.) The average Black person, be he teacher or student, wasn’t looking to become dependent on White people. However, this legal history is largely unknown to our people, so we approach the question from the perspective mistaught to us from Europeans. I.e. we go by the false premise that our ancestors largely sought equality. Worse, we reduce our movement to a movement of ‘legislation.’ If we were more critically thinking, we’d realize that Homosexuals only can’t marry. That is in no way on par with the oppression of Black people where our very culture and contributions are denied and doubted throughout our whole experience; nevermind the ongoing slavery within Prisons and the dissolution of our families, dependence of our people and disconnection from one another.

    It’s of the utmost absurdity to even mention homosexuals in the same sentence as African people. What’s more, it’s as if we do not understand ‘homosexuality.’ Homosexuality is very certainly a choice; homosexuality is exclusive sex with one’s own sex. To do something exclusively is a choice. You can ask “Does that mean that heterosexuality is a choice?” but you’d need to ask that down at the Prison or Jailhouse. The European is naturally pan-sexual–of the lowest chakra–sex is recreation be it with man, woman or dog. The White man is oppressing himself, choosing to oppress himself and oppressing against his natural choice–but that’s not your problem as an African person. The sympathy for the Homosexual culture is in another phrase “Massa, you alright?”

    Black people need to become focused, because besides Cynthia Mckinney, you can’t name a Black elected official who hasn’t slept with a White man. You can hardly name a rapper on the radio either. So what in the world is this nonsense about even entertaining such a question? The homosexual, quicker than the heterosexual, will do an injustice to African people.

  15. To wit, Brown V Board of Ed came as a result of a court case by a Black school for asking a White school for their old dilapidated buses, so that the Black school can better transport their Black students to school–the Whites fought against even giving out their rusted, tried buses and since Black integrationists took the case and turned it into something it wasn’t.

  16. Great reply! I totally agree! We were beaten,killed and enslaved for hundreds of years. We had our culture,identity and religion stole from us. And black women and men were both raped by European slave masters. How can homosexuals say it’s the same struggle? Please! It’s nowhere near the same. It’s an insult to my ancestors to even compare the two.

  17. first comment..love this blog very very informative ty sis 4 fighting 4 us…
    @blackmystory…dito high 5 and amen..i first thought i would continue reading all of the kumbaya (sp) lets hold hands and march w/the gays…excuse my french but hell no my people why r we continuously falling for this..join w/hispanics join w/ww now gay is supposedly the new black its insulting and i hope we as women especially stop condoning and accepting this white sexual perversion/behavior as natural…MAAT= harmony& balance within nature..,any act any lifestyle that conflicts w/nature is not acceptable .. besides all that no one i mean no group ever stands up when an issue affecting us comes up…black first and only imho…

  18. That’s a great site brother. I’ve spoken with Irritated Genie a few times. He’s a very insightful brother. I’ve ordered a lot of his dvd’s. They’re very informative.

  19. blackmystory on said:

    A case in point, is here is a knee-grow who has decided to ban locks and breads at Hampton school of business becasue it is not presentable.

    http://www.wvec.com/my-city/hampton/Business-school-dean-stands-by-ban-on-dreadlocks-and-cornrows-166809246.html.

    White Supremacy has us going so far backwards that we are in a rush to do their works and subjugating each other to the vilest of acts. How in hell does that make one less employable? Becasue the coded meaning is that you are a “black” person and WILL be held back, so if you become less celebratant of who you are MAYBE you will get to sit next to some Cauasian in their washroom. Do you think this stuff would happen to homosexuals? And by homosexuals I am talking largely about the non knee-grow ones, becasue you know the knee-grows are catching hell inside and outside that community of upside down people. Upside down in Amenta.

  20. Looks like someone’s off his meds. Oh I forgot, Big Pharma is EEEEEVVVVVIIIILLLL!!!!!!!

  21. blackmystory on said:

    Maybe African people SHOULD be off of big pharma’s drug pushing evil crack so we can drop some Nat Turner lick on those who deserve it. Do you want some satanfic force?

  22. The topic makes that seem that being gay and being black are mutually exclusive. No matter. From we hear that you are a black man, you can always come home. ALWAYS.

    ere’s the thing: Seventy percent of black Californians voted for the ban … compared to 49 percent of white voters and 53 percent of Latino voters? Experts say black and Latino voters also overwhelmingly voted to pass similar measures in Florida and Arizona.

    Now there seems to be a “blame the blacks” backlash by gay and lesbian protesters.

    This article says that a black gay male couple carrying “no on 8” were harassed by white gays and lesbians during a protest against the newly-passed gay marriage ban. Another person who also supported gay rights was called the N word.

    Gay is the new black? Yumad?!!?!! Black is Black!!! And nothing else!!!

  23. Onitaset:

    Quite excellent comments….

    Then being “born gay” is a coined phrase geared to mislead and confuse? What would you say to those that claim to knowing they were gay since childhood?

  24. OK folks…my humble opinion?

    First great and insightful comments to ALL.

    Second, gay rights and black rights ARE NOT the same thing. Yes both are marginalized but comparing the two in the same breath is like comparing discrimination between blacks and fat people and blacks and senior citizenship.

    Never before has any group in history been subjected to the dehumanization and sexual suffering than the African peoples. While it’s important to recognize all groups that are oppressed, the black struggle is unique in its own way since it’s a global institutionalized conspiracy to wipe us off the face of the earth.

    Gays in our society CAN and DO progress extremely well with matters of employment, education, healthcare and standard of living. It is not the same for blacks.

    I almost feel like whenever certain groups want to be “recognized” and heard, like the Organization for Fat People, they latch on to the long suffering plight of the black family with hopes of our understanding and sympathy and GUIDANCE.

    My question always is, “Where were you when we needed help?”

    Harvey Milk was a trailblazer by fighting for equal rights for all oppressed people but in my opinion, while they do deserve respect, as all humans do, the struggle is NOT the same and should not be treated as such.

  25. Sister truthbetold,

    I was having this conversation the other day and heard the same objection. First, we need to return to the origin of the Homosexual identity: in Europe “homosexualism” was invented around the Age of Individualism. Before “Individualism” as an ideology there was no rhyme or reason to associate oneself with one’s sexuality. Before this, at worse rival tribes like England and France would assert to one another that the other was more feminine. Yet, individually one did not assert exclusive sexuality like homosexuality. Instead, especially if one were European, one partook in homosexual and heterosexual relationships. This is not ‘homosexual’ (the exclusive sex) but ‘bisexual.’ This is why the word “homosexual” was invented in the modern age. Not to say that certain rare people were not exclusive in their homosexual sex, but there was no identifier thusly–and even then it’s a choice–see prison again. In other words “homosexual” is an invented group.

    On to the idea of the ‘gay since childhood.’ A lot of African people are ‘Pro-White since Childhood.” But we know that, that’s nurture not nature. The idea that a child can not be corrupted by a society is one of the worst mainstays in our mindset. Everyone knows that children can be corrupted/affected by society. This is how children learn how to eat, learn how to speak, learn how to walk, learn how to think.

    The assumption that a child represents purity and a lack of corruption was dispelled ages ago. I forget his name but I heard the story. It seems that there was a King who wanted to learn the natural language of humans, so he locked children away with food but without adults so as to return later and see what language they speak. When the children were checked upon, all of them starved to death. We mustn’t forget that children represent us, not nature. A feral child walks on all fours and makes noises like its caregiver even if the caregiver barks.

    Regardless, homosexuals are the current group that is oppressing African people most harshly. That we do not recognize this is one of the worse symptoms of our oppression. How is the homosexual being oppressed if the government officials themselves are homosexual?

    For instance, the transsexual and intersexual prostitutes of Washington D.C. are extremely frequented and extremely expensive. As are child prostitutes in New York City. And Black rappers and politicians are “raped” by European men. That’s informative as to what class of people are running the scenes: homosexuals, bisexuals, pedophiles, and pan-sexuals.

    The ‘Homosexual Oppression’ is artificial; mostly because African culture is antithetical to European culture of homosexuality and “America” aspires to be Egypt. That’s a separate conversation.

  26. blackmystory on said:

    How can a child know it is homosexual? A child will gravitate to people and or things it likes and move away from those they don’t. Little boys if left alone, will gravitate to little boys until they become more mature and more aware of the difference from a psychological space. My seven year old son, sees two lesbians kissing and immediately exclaims eeeeyew, girls shouldn’t kiss girls! Both his parents were suprised at his strong reaction. Did we condition him to come out strong against girls kissing girls? No, but seeing his parents interact inculcate a certain over standing in his mind. Like wise this thing about children being homosexual is another artificial contruct played out by those whose agenda is to homosexualize our children. You don’t think they teach this stuff in kidergarden…away from parents eyes? What of homosexuals adopting children, you don’t thinkk the children aren’t influenced by what goes on in the home?

    How can one know truth without challenging it first?. And ff what you challenge fails the test of consistency based on prior evidential facts, buried in cultural narratives, oral and written our story and practices, then is it still the truth?.

  27. Again u floor me! Very well said.

  28. @ blackmystory

    Ok. Fair enough.

  29. Like wise this thing about children being homosexual is another artificial contruct played out by those whose agenda is to homosexualize our children. (SF lolwut!!) You don’t think they teach this stuff in kidergarden…away from parents eyes? What of homosexuals adopting children, you don’t thinkk the children aren’t influenced by what goes on in the home?

    OK then.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting

    Scientific research has been generally consistent in showing that gay and lesbian parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents

    How can one know truth without challenging it first?.

    How can one know truth if you don’t know truth? How would you know it was true
    so that you could challenge it in the first place?

    Seeing that this blog has become a hangout for conspiracy theorists, Afrocentrists, pseudo-militant types and other such wierdos, useless losers and useful idiots, here’s my conspiracy theory:

    The whole idea of black people focusing on what homosexuals do is nothing more than a cynical move by opportunistic politicians, church leaders, activists and other such ‘community leaders’ to secure the black vote. They use the same divide-and-conquer techniques the British used to rule their empire against modern day blacks in order gain wealth and class power. This especially effective against useful idiots who believe in strange conspiracies and ‘alternative histories,’ leading these same numbskulls to act against their own interests, thus keeping them in a constant state of stagnation and ignorance.

    So, what do you all think about my theory?

  30. Dear Lucifer:

    Glad you think I’m a conspiracy theory looney-bin wanna-be Afrocentric Angela Davis Jah-preaching nutcase. Yet you’re here with us and I don’t even have a picture of her on here:

    http://ts2.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=4705433707480545&id=cb8b4c4d0a4db282c866b7033c4b1c9f

  31. Hey, that’s not Angela Davis!!!!

    Glad you think I’m a conspiracy theory looney-bin wanna-be Afrocentric Angela Davis Jah-preaching nutcase. Yet you’re here with us and I don’t even have a picture of her on here:

    No, I don’t think that you’re as crazy a most of your posters. But still, I’m think I’m going to have fun trolling here for a while. Oh, and what do you think of my theory?

  32. blackmystory on said:

    You know whenever African people get together to dialogue on things that affect us, there is always a devil or a Satan, coming around to disrupt things. This is the so called “white privilege” that is spoken of by others. They hate us or say they hate us, ridicule us, yet can’t leave us alone. Their true power is in keeping us off balanced and distracted, keeping us emotional instead of being rational. This is the main tool of the instigators. Anybody with the name Satan in its avatar can’t be about anything good. Still it can go screw the Baphomet goat or whatever it wants, just go accost the homosexuals in power who are truly oppressing the rank and file homosexuals and leave us alone. That is if you are as brave as you act like you are ….internet gangster.

  33. tehnoun on said:

    I think a discussion on the, and I quote “(white) women are the n*gger of the world” mindset a lot of white feminists have could be a good followup to this post. I know I cringe every time that comparison is made.

  34. Brilliant Satan. Just brilliant. I just read you new post and you’re right on track.

  35. @ Tehnoun

    I never heard of that quote. I could do a white man and white woman post and how they relate to one another but if I do, you know it will be brutally honest.

  36. @ Blackmystory
    Ok….things are getting a bit heated here.

    Satan is a black West Indian man with a wicked sense of humour. He does like to pick on folks…A LOT but does have words of wisdom and is extremely well read.

    @ Satan

    See what you did? Now go to your room young man…you’re grounded!

  37. You know whenever African people get together to dialogue on things that affect us, there is always a devil or a Satan, coming around to disrupt things. This is the so called “white privilege” that is spoken of by others. They hate us or say they hate us, ridicule us, yet can’t leave us alone.

    HAHAHAHHAAAAAAHAAAAAHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAHHHAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAHHAHAHAHHHHHHHAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHHAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!! Oh God, I think I just pissed myself, goddammit.

    Ok. I’ll give this post a break.

  38. Ron Thomas on said:

    It would appear we got wayyyyyyyyyyyyy afield of the original question, and personal feelings got the better of us. It happens, but in a conversation among adults, which I presume we all are, there is room for reason as well as rancor.

    Nobody is downplaying the severity of what we have gone thru; the question was whether we thought the Gay & LBGT struggle was comparable to the Civil Rights struggle.

    As functional and educated adults, can’t we have a simple debate about this where everyone’s opinion carries equal weight, and regardless of your personal demons, anger, or whatever moves you, leave it at that? I don’t expect to agree with everyone here, and Lord knows I don’t expect everyone to agree with me, but COME ON FOLKS: I’m halfway expecting to see weapons drawn in what was supposed to be a civilized conversation about an issue that DOES affect us a Blacks, whether we want to acknowledge it or not.

    We’re still going to have to deal with it, and as a lot of our people are in that group, we had best get with the program on educating them that while it may be their lifestyle, don’t try and equate it with a struggle that is much more complex.

    And in this room, where presumably we are all equals, can we be a little LESS rancorous with each other?

    After all, it’s just an academic discussion.

  39. @ Ron

    My posts, as you will see, tend to get verrrry emotional because it speaks to all of us in some way shape or form.

    And you are correct, personal demons do get in the way but at the end of the day, we’re all fighting for the same cause.

  40. mary burrell on said:

    @Ron Thomas, Well said. This a very touchy subject. I was afraid to make a comment. Because with this subject it’s damn if you do, And damn if you don’t. Peace to everyone.

  41. Miss Mary

    On this blog, everyone is welcomed to speak their minds. We need an outlet for this stuff.

  42. No. This is EXACTLY the space to be rancorous. We are all anonymous on Web 2.0 (asynchronous communication), so we really should be calling each other out on whatever bitchassness occurs, and clowning people with different opinions than ours. Fuck civilized, I will show that my opinion carries superior weight, through reason. Equal weight? Have you been reading some of the comments here? Pure bitchassness. I have to put an end to it. Once and for all.

  43. ChazIng on said:

    Wikipedia should not be used as a source of truth. Most universities do not allow Wikipedia citations for reports.

    Seeing that this blog has become a hangout for conspiracy theorists, Afrocentrists, pseudo-militant types and other such wierdos, useless losers and useful idiots, ….

    Wikipedia and now ad hominem, is that how you think people will change their minds?

  44. SomeGuy on said:

    I get the feeling that you’re all out of gum. (They Live)

  45. Mickey on said:

    This was discussed on Racialicious during that Occupy Wallstreet demonstration. When that quote first came up, a Black feminist asked, ” If women are the niggers of the world, what does that make Black women? Double niggers?” I have even read about the song created by John Lennon of the same name and he even asked several Black activists, including Dick Gregory, if it was even okay for him to even write that song.

  46. tehnoun on said:

    I’d much rather have brutal honesty than sugarcoating. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t have stuck around. 😛

  47. tehnoun on said:

    Back when I used to identify with the movement, I actually heard that ridiculous quote uttered more than once (ESPECIALLY when I moved to Ocala, not taht said movement is exactly going strong around here…). It was face palm worthy and just plain embarrassing every time.

  48. Seeing that this blog has become a hangout for conspiracy theorists, Afrocentrists, pseudo-militant types and other such wierdos, useless losers and useful idiots, here’s my conspiracy theory:

    Oh boy…now you’ve gone and done it….

    The whole idea of black people focusing on what homosexuals do is nothing more than a cynical move by opportunistic politicians, church leaders, activists and other such ‘community leaders’ to secure the black vote. They use the same divide-and-conquer techniques the British used to rule their empire against modern day blacks in order gain wealth and class power. This especially effective against useful idiots who believe in strange conspiracies and ‘alternative histories,’ leading these same numbskulls to act against their own interests, thus keeping them in a constant state of stagnation and ignorance.

    “Alternative histories?” No, more like constructed realities.

    So, what do you all think about my theory?

    Personally, i think it maybe too logical.

  49. One needs to think about how or why Jay-Z himself who never advocates on the part of African people would advocate on the part of White Homosexuals.

    In the words of the immortal Gwyneth Paltrow: “[N-words] in [P]aris for real!”

  50. Wikipedia should not be used as a source of truth. Most universities do not allow Wikipedia citations for reports.

    Ah. I see your trying to use your brain. Please stop.

    The original studies are numbered 3 through 10, something you could have had easily checked for yourself if you were so interested.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting#cite_note-cpa2006-2

    This a blog post, not a Master’s Thesis, besides, most of the comments here would fail any standard of logical, factual or argumentative rigour far harder than my Wikipedia link would. I certainly haven’t seen anything that relates to fact, other than personal anecdotes and emotion-laden whining.

    and now ad hominem, is that how you think people will change their minds?

    Fuck changing your mind, I’m here to intellectually bitchslap you bitchasses fr my own personal amusement. You can either ignore the insults, and see the deeper critique and correct yourselves, or you can continue to grumbl and cry like a bitch. The choice is yours.

  51. ChazIng on said:

    Most same sex studies suffer from poor methodology as stated explicitly in your Wikipedia source [3]. The recent controversial study by Mark Regnerus also states this [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X12000610, free download]. This is a social science matter and thus open to quite varying interpretations. Some with PhDs have interpreted these studies and concluded differently. Should I simply post URLs? Would that make their interpretation correct? One would hope not since that’s not how to discuss anything on blog posts or in master’s theses.

    I go back to my original point, unless one can show genetically (hard science) how homosexuals are different, one cannot even start to make any equivalence between homosexuality and African slavery. Even if this elusive ‘gay gene’ is found, one would have to figure out why it differs from the heterosexual gene and if it is ‘natural’ (it may be a mutation due to an environmental pressure). Since reproduction is an undisputed natural process, homosexuality might be naturally found in nature but not necessarily an evolutionary benefit. And if something is not beneficial, then one can choose (and perhaps should choose) to stay away from these types of relationships as do some religious homosexuals, especially Roman Catholics.

  52. I go back to my original point, unless one can show genetically (hard science) how homosexuals are different, one cannot even start to make any equivalence between homosexuality and African slavery.

    True, but irrelevant, as no sensible person would make that claim.

    homosexuality might be naturally found in nature but not necessarily an evolutionary benefit. And if something is not beneficial, then one can choose

    See what you did there? You equivocatous little bastard. sing the word ‘benefit’ when they actually have two different meanings. Altruism has no evolutionary benefit (see Darwin’s Descent of Man), but surely, we would not want to abandon the social , moral and psychological benefits that altruism brings,now would we?

    Most same sex studies suffer from poor methodology as stated explicitly in your Wikipedia source

    Here is the entire quote, in context. from said report. Emphasis mine.

    Although the research relied on by supporters of marriage of same-sex couples is not without its methodological flaws (as can be made the case for almost an area of scientific inquiry), it is based on comparisons of children with same-sex and opposite-sex parents. Herek points out that this
    group of studies is more relevant to the marriage debate and the findings of this group of studies are very consistent. A review of the psychological research into the well-being of children raised by same-sex and opposite-sex parents continues to indicate that there are no reliable differences in their mental health or social adjustment and that lesbian mothers and gay fathers are not less fit as parents than are their heterosexual counterparts.

    Just skimming through the Regenus study, and for the most part, it states that the best situation for the children is a home with both biological parents present.

    Perhaps you should quote in context, instead of just posting URLs.

  53. Personally, i think it maybe too logical.

    But isn’t that the problem with any conspiracy theory? It assumes that puppetmasters are all powerful , all knowing, and immune to budget conatraints, bad weather, natural disasters and other black swan type events.

  54. blackmystory on said:

    @moderator…”Satan is a black West Indian man with a wicked sense of humour. He does like to pick on folks…A LOT but does have words of wisdom and is extremely well read”…..

    This is quite interesting. In a time when homosexuality and feminism is being used by the power structure to accentuate their genocidal plans, this is his purpose? to be an instigator? I went on his site and am educated a bit more on his frame of mind and thus over stand why this conversation devolved the way it did. Rest assured he wouldn’t survive with that attitude in the area I grew up in in Jamaica. None the less I have chosen to not comment after this on your blog, because this is a serious topic for me, not an excuse to yank people’s chain. I am a stranger here so I will enjoy my own bias blogging.

    Thank you for allowing me to share my views.

    Asante Sana

  55. Tyrone on said:

    Negress

    I don’t see it. Whenever another wants to push ish from the left(not the norm), they try to align themselves with black people. As if, we’re supposed to support their agenda. Because our ancestors were slaves in this country and beyond, we have to go along with the bs. Tyrone is a free blackman, nobody tells me how to think and what to believe in. If i don’t support it, nobody is gonna guilt me into following the crowd…Period! Black folk tried to be everybody’s friend on the planet, and what has it gotten us in the US? Our race took all the arrows, making it possible for others to excel. The same people that we helped get on their feet, treat us like dirt at the same time. Spanish folk love to party and bulls**t with black folk, but, when it comes time to get a job…Bilingual Need Only Apply! If not for African-Americans, they wouldn’t be in this country. Spanish folk taught me a valuable lesson, black people need to stop worrying about what other folk are doing. God gave all of us a tongue, if gays and lesbians can’t speak up for themselves, that’s on them. It goes back to the old saying…”Fool me once, shame on you, Fool me twice, shame on me.” The bottomline…folk need to stop lumping their ish in with our struggle, because, they don’t love us like that. All of us are competing for money, power, prestige, resources, access, which is why racism will always exist on this planet. Others already know how to play the game, we need to catch up to the rest of the world.

    Tyrone

  56. Because Jay Z does whatever his Zionist-White supremacist masters tell him to do. He nor Beyonce for that matter,don’t give a damn about black people. All they care about his making money. They’re down with whatever agenda the Beast wants done.

  57. LGBT equality and black equality efforts aren’t the same for 1 simple reason: as onerous as it would be, LGBTs could “pass” as straight if they had to do so. OTOH, there is nothing that black/any other POC could do to pass as “white”. I’ve met more than my share of “out”/”weekend warrior”/”closeted” LGBT people in my time (between DJing gigs and working with Marines, you meet a lot of strange people), and I (personally speaking) have never met an active LGBT person who hasn’t dabbled in opposite sex attraction. *Ever*.

    I am not saying that the experience would be pleasant, or even tolerable in the long term, but if the government (or the church, or the police or any lower authority structure) were to declare homosexuality a capital offense *tomorrow*, LGBTs would be alright. If “not being visibly/Teutonic and lighter-skinned” white were declared a capital offense, we’d be dead. We, as black people, wouldn’t be able to ally ourselves with white people. LGBTs, OTOH, have been engaging in faux marriages for millennia. There have always been straight men and women who were willing to hide and protect gay people from their oppressors. POC don’t have the same benefits.

    Do LGBT have their own row to hoe (farming term, not sexual comment)? Yes. Are their lives (on average) more difficult than their straight counterparts? Yes. Does it compare to the levels of stress (physical, mental, lethal, etc.), that POCs have experienced around the world at the hands and guns of white people? No.

  58. ChazIng on said:

    You equivocatous little bastard.

    Well it is a post on a blog and not a thesis ….. though I disagree with the charge of equivocation

    Altruism has no evolutionary benefit

    That’s not what evolutionists say and a consistent evolutionist must find benefit in altruism as he must believe that everything evolves for the ‘purpose’ of survival

    Just skimming through the Regenus study, and for the most part, it states that the best situation for the children is a home with both biological parents present.

    From Regnerus:

    The answer lies in part with the small or nonprobability samples so often relied upon in nearly all previous studies— …… While the architects of such studies have commonly and appropriately acknowledged their limitations, practically—since they are often the only studies being conducted—their results are treated as providing information about gay and lesbian household experiences in general.

    On the limits of sampling method:

    Snowball and various other types of convenience sampling are simply not widely generalizable or comparable to the population of interest as a whole. While researchers themselves commonly note this important limitation, it is often entirely lost in the translation and transmission of findings by the media to the public.

    Perhaps you should quote in context, instead of just posting URLs.

    Even in supposed context, I don’t see what you are getting at. If something (methodology) has flaws, then the results and interpretation thereof (even if replicated) are questionable though not necessarily flawed.

    Actually, you non-sequitured yourself by posting the URL and quote since the assertion was that homosex parents homosexualize children through parental influence, not that homosex parents were not fit or capable and/or the children unhealthy and poorly adjusted. I have not heard about studies on the homosexualizing effect of homosex parenting but if you have, please post.

  59. tehnoun on said:

    … I want to comment on the… interesting direction the discussion has taken, but I find that there’s no civil way for me to do that so I’m going to keep my lips zipped for now.

  60. On of my friends suffers from bipolar. If me and the rest of hos friends don;t make sure that he takes his meds, he usually gets into a situation where he hurts himself (fights, stabbing, lock at Duhaney Park Police Station.) With his meds however, he can hold down a job and go to night school. So no, I don’t think that ‘ African people SHOULD be off of big pharma’s drug pushing evil crack’

  61. Ok. lets get to the bottom of this. No pun intended.

    since the assertion was that homosex parents homosexualize children through parental influence, not that homosex parents were not fit or capable and/or the children unhealthy and poorly adjusted. I have not heard about studies on the homosexualizing effect of homosex parenting but if you have, please post.

    I don’t know about ‘homosex’ parents but here are some studies regarding the (lack of) ‘homosexualizing effect of homosex parenting.’

    Sexual orientation of adult sons of gay fathers.
    Bailey, J. Michael; Bobrow, David; Wolfe, Marilyn; Mikach, Sarah
    Developmental Psychology, Vol 31(1), Jan 1995, 124-129. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.31.1.124

    http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/dev/31/1/124/

    Abstract: The sexual development of children of gay and lesbian parents is interesting for both scientific and social reasons. The present study is the largest to date to focus on the sexual orientation of adult sons of gay men. From advertisements in gay publications, 55 gay or bisexual men were recruited who reported on 82 sons at least 17 yrs of age. More than 90% of sons whose sexual orientations could be rated were heterosexual. Furthermore, gay and heterosexual sons did not differ on potentially relevant variables such as the length of time they had lived with their fathers. Results suggest that any environmental influence of gay fathers on their sons’ sexual orientation is not large. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

    Sexual identity of 37 children raised by homosexual or transsexual parents

    http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?Volume=135&page=692&journalID=13

    Abstract: The author reports on 37 children who are being raised by female homosexuals or by parents who have changed sex (transsexuals): 21 by female homosexuals, 7 by male-to-female transsexuals, and 9 by female- to-male transsexuals. The children range in age from 3 to 20 years (mean = 9.3) and have lived in the sexually atypical households for 1- 16 years (mean = 4.9). Thirty-six of the children report or recall childhood toy, game, clothing, and peer group preferences that are typical for their sex. The 13 older children who report erotic fantasies or overt sexual behaviors are all heterosexually oriented.

    http://wikis.lib.ncsu.edu/images/c/cb/Gay_and_lesbian_foster_parents.pdf

    Children in lesbian and single-parent households: psychosexual and psychiatric appraisal.

    Abstract: Thirty-seven school-age children reared in 27 lesbian households were compared with 38 school-age children reared in 27 heterosexual single-parent households, with respect to their psychosexual development and their emotions, behaviour and relationships. Systematic standardized interviews with the mothers and with the children, together with parent and teacher questionnaires, were used to make the psychosexual and psychiatric appraisal. The two groups did not differ in terms of their gender identity, sex role behaviour or sexual orientation. Also, they did not differ on most measures of emotions, behaviour and relationships–although there was some indication of more frequent psychiatric problems in the single-parent group. It was concluded that rearing in a lesbian household per se did not lead to atypical psychosexual development or constitute a psychiatric risk factor.

    I’m sorry. You didn’t quote the Wikipedia link I had placed out of context . You just plain lied. Posting the abstract and links will stop you from bullshitting or lying.

    With regard to your quote about sampling, what Regenerus critiques is convenience sampling, a technique that is used due to the prohibitive cost of using a national probability sample. But if you received a 750,000 USD grant from conservative think-tanks (like Regenerus did) , the flaws of sampling are easily overcome. The Regenerus has some serious flaws I believe (see below)…..

    http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/06/10/45512

    ..but that is not the general point I wish to make.

    The topic of this post has to do with “gay being the new black.” . the unstated implications of such a phrase being 1. Gay has usurped black in terms of public attention 2. Gays are now using the tactics of blacks to achieve social justice, and 3. Gays are piggybacking off ofblacks, but not rendering assistance in return. All of the above are patently false for many reasons, but there is nothing in the original post, or the implications of that post that would cause anyone to go intoa comment about the ”homosexualization of the Youth”

    What has that to do with anything? Especially when it is unsupported by fact or solid argument?

    What I think your statement proves, is that most Afrocentric types are not radical, but have views that are more in line with right-wing Republicans, especially when it comes to women, homosexuals and abortion. Combine that with crazy conspiracy theories (eg. a Gay Agenda to ”homosexualize” children) and you basically have the John Birch Society/ Tea Party in blackface and dashikis. Thus your argumentt can contribute nothing to this post, much less black people.

  62. ChazIng on said:

    Ok. lets get to the bottom of this.

    To scientifically investigate an issue, one must assess evidence both for and against a case. What studies have you investigated that affirms the thesis that homosex parents cause children to become homosexualized?

  63. @Chazing

    The usual right wing nutballs (American College of Pediatricians), but the evidence I’ve presented is for the most part falsifiable and verifiable. Do you have any scientific evidence, or any other rationale for the points you make? What do you think about my ‘conspiracy theory? ‘ Do you have anything that can refute those studies?

  64. To scientifically investigate an issue, one must assess evidence both for and against a case. What studies have you investigated that affirms the thesis that homosex parents cause children to become homosexualized?

    I am not scientifically investigating any issue. I’m commenting on a blog. I am sure the psychologists and the statisticians have done their best to verify and falsify their claims using the usually hypothesis testing. All I see opposing the claims supported by various international bodies are those by right wing loons like the American College of Pediatricians.

    And what counter claims have you looked at for cse. What evidence or argument do you have to counter anything I have posted?

  65. ChazIng on said:

    The usual right wing nutballs (American College of Pediatricians)

    Ad-hominem again.

    but the evidence I’ve presented is for the most part falsifiable and verifiable.

    That means nothing as to its truth just to the study following a methodology (supposedly).

    Do you have any scientific evidence, or any other rationale for the points you make?

    Shifting the burden, if you recall, the initial claim was not mine, the initial counterclaim was yours so that if you want to argue, I have no need to present evidence but I can question your evidence.

    What do you think about my ‘conspiracy theory?

    Like almost all conspiracy theories, it may indeed be correct. That’s as far as I would evaluate it.

    ‘ Do you have anything that can refute those studies?

    Yes, once again, if there is no genetic evidence and it cannot be shown that homosexuality is both natural and productive, then all studies on if and how homosexuality does not affect children is effete. Additionally, some of these studies use bisexual men and one study (Bailey et al. 1995) used men who were classified as homosexual and bisexual but had biological children. If a homosex parent shares genetics with their child, this means that the parent in question is actually bisexual, sexually confused or in some form of a transition along the sexuality continuum. Who is to say that they would not re-transition to heterosexuality? To be purely homosexual is to not be able to produce children, at least not through vaginal intercourse. Thus, a case can be made that said parents experienced form of heterosexualization negating the intent of the study from the onset.

    This dear satanforce, is what is called scientific analysis. If you want to argue for a position, you need to do the same and not post abstracts to peer-reviewed papers in that wacky soft science named psychology.

    I am not scientifically investigating any issue.

    Then pray tell, how do you ‘intend to get to the bottom’ of any issue? Are you planning to troll others until they submit to your view?

    I’m commenting on a blog. I am sure the psychologists and the statisticians have done their best to verify and falsify their claims using the usually hypothesis testing.

    Appeal to authority, seems you like to include at least one logical fallacy per post.

    All I see opposing the claims supported by various international bodies are those by right wing loons like the American College of Pediatricians.

    Ad hominem again again again, have you patented this fallacy or something?

    And what counter claims have you looked at for cse. What evidence or argument do you have to counter anything I have posted?

    Once again, that’s for you to do since you asserted that unlike the rest of us on this post, you actually knew what you were talking about. Recall,

    Seeing that this blog has become a hangout for conspiracy theorists, Afrocentrists, pseudo-militant types and other such wierdos, useless losers and useful idiots, …

  66. ChazIng on said:

    The usual right wing nutballs (American College of Pediatricians)

    Ad-hominem again.

    but the evidence I’ve presented is for the most part falsifiable and verifiable.

    That means nothing as to its truth just to the study following a methodology (supposedly).

    Do you have any scientific evidence, or any other rationale for the points you make?

    Shifting the burden, if you recall, the initial claim was not mine, the initial counterclaim was yours so that if you want to argue, I have no need to present evidence but I can question your evidence.

    What do you think about my ‘conspiracy theory?

    Like almost all conspiracy theories, it may indeed be correct. That’s as far as I would evaluate it.

    ‘ Do you have anything that can refute those studies?

    Yes, once again, if there is no genetic evidence and it cannot be shown that homosexuality is both natural and productive, then all studies on if and how homosexuality does not affect children is effete. Additionally, some of these studies use bisexual men and one study (Bailey et al. 1995) used men who were classified as homosexual and bisexual but had biological children. If a homosex parent shares genetics with their child, this means that the parent in question is actually bisexual, sexually confused or in some form of a transition along the sexuality continuum. Who is to say that they would not re-transition to heterosexuality? To be purely homosexual is to not be able to produce children, at least not through vaginal intercourse. Thus, a case can be made that said parents experienced form of heterosexualization negating the intent of the study from the onset.

    This dear satanforce, is what is called scientific analysis. If you want to argue for a position, you need to do the same and not post abstracts to peer-reviewed papers in that wacky soft science named psychology.

  67. OK. Everyone Needs to Cool Down.

    A simple post meant to bring out an opinion on a touchy subject has gotten, once again, off track and hostile. Why? Why can’t we debate like adults?

    Homosexuality is always going to be a hot topic, especially concerning the black community. Debate all you want. Vent all you want. What I don’t agree with is the name calling.

  68. ChazIng on said:

    I am not scientifically investigating any issue.

    Then pray tell, how do you ‘intend to get to the bottom’ of any issue? Are you planning to troll others until they submit to your view?

    I’m commenting on a blog. I am sure the psychologists and the statisticians have done their best to verify and falsify their claims using the usually hypothesis testing.

    Appeal to authority, seems you like to include at least one logical fallacy per post.

    All I see opposing the claims supported by various international bodies are those by right wing loons like the American College of Pediatricians.

    Ad hominem again again again, have you patented this fallacy or something?

    And what counter claims have you looked at for cse. What evidence or argument do you have to counter anything I have posted?

    Once again, that’s for you to do since you asserted that unlike the rest of us on this post, you actually knew what you were talking about. Recall,

    Seeing that this blog has become a hangout for conspiracy theorists, Afrocentrists, pseudo-militant types and other such wierdos, useless losers and useful idiots, …

  69. Shifting the burden, if you recall, the initial claim was not mine, the initial counterclaim was yours so that if you want to argue, I have no need to present evidence but I can question your evidence.

    Your initial claim.

    the assertion was that homosex parents homosexualize children through parental influence, not that homosex parents were not fit or capable and/or the children unhealthy and poorly adjusted. I have not heard about studies on the homosexualizing effect of homosex parenting but if you have, please post

    You still haven’t backed it up. Nice trick though.

    I have no need to present evidence

    To scientifically investigate an issue, one must assess evidence both for and against a case. What studies have you investigated that affirms the thesis that homosex parents cause children to become homosexualized?

    I wish you would follow your own advice. You are using armchair biology to try and investigate something that has been already been investigated. It doesn’t look like you have looked into views that oppose your own, else you wouldn’t be using made up phrases like ‘pure homosexual’,

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080617204459.htm
    http://www.economist.com/node/12465295
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13674-evolution-myths-natural-selection-cannot-explain-homosexuality.html

    Of course, you would say that this is not ‘scientific analysis’, which is in of itself a contradiction. science does not use ‘analysis’ in the colloquial sense, because it relies on empiricism, it uses experimentation. If no experiment can be performed , then mathematical models and statistics are used. And unless you plan on going around with surveys and a laptop with SPSS installed, we are not being empirical, but engaging in a rational debate.

    No wonder the Human Biodiversity types make you all look like a bunch of idiots to you guys , R is just a letter in the alphabet and NumPy is a misspelling. Its the only way guys like you could possibly think that a hypothesis test is an appeal to authority. Or that you could think that ‘truth’ has any validity inn the context of science. All experiments are tentative, til the next paradigm shift, or someone does better. It used to be true that light was a wave, then it became a particle, now its somewhere between the two. But isn’t hat the thing with guys like you? Using all them big words like ‘effete’, without knowing how to put it in a damn sentence, or making words like ‘homosexualize.’ Lemme guess, you probably didn’t go to college or have a degree in some useless subject they made up to get money from you. So you think using them big words will make you sound like a real ‘scientific analyst’, Amirite?

    You could have at least scientifically analyzed that procreation doesn’t require sexual arousal or sexual intercourse, and intercourse can be done without being aroused by the person you’re sexing (you should know all about this.)

    Who is to say that they would not re-transition to heterosexuality?

    I don’t know. Who’s to say all those guys having homosex in prison and the military won’t re-transition to homosexuality when they resiume their normal heterosexual lives?

    I have no need to present evidence but I can question your evidence.

    Yep, you’ve proven that you’re a dumbass. I win.

  70. ChazIng on said:

    The initial claim about homsexualization of children was not mine. Sorry if I assumed incorrectly that you could read. I am not investigating anything, you are. I am questioning your investigation.

    I wish you would follow your own advice. You are using armchair biology to try and investigate something that has been already been investigated. It doesn’t look like you have looked into views that oppose your own, else you wouldn’t be using made up phrases like ‘pure homosexual’

    Once again, you are the one investigating, I’m not. But even so:

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080617204459.htm
    http://www.economist.com/node/12465295

    Both assert that homosexual males are born to more fecundative females

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13674-evolution-myths-natural-selection-cannot-explain-homosexuality.html

    This asserts that homosexual males are born to more fecundative females, homosexuality includes bisexuality (in humans), homosexuality includes bisexuality (in animals) and other tedious arguments.

    So fecundity: Assume that female (F) has a homosexual son (H) and heterosexual sons (S) and daughters (D). If H causes F to be more fedundative, then homosexuality would be higher in societies where there are highly fertile females. Using the latest data [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_fertility_rate] for 2012, the 10 most fertile nations are Niger, Uganda, Mali, Somalia, Burundi, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Zambia, Afghanistan and DR of Congo. Are you willing to assert that these countries have larger homosexual male percentage populations than other countries?

    But let’s assume that F is more fertile? Would that be beneficial? Not necessarily since she can pass her X gene to other children and make them homosexual as well. This would not provide an overall increase in offspring since it would decrease the amount of F’s grandchildren. Thus fecundity in a localized context (F and children) may be beneficial but on a larger context (F and grandchildren) would not necessarily be beneficial.

  71. ChazIng on said:

    Of course, you would say that this is not ‘scientific analysis’, which is in of itself a contradiction. science does not use ‘analysis’ in the colloquial sense, because it relies on empiricism, it uses experimentation.

    You assume that I’m using this in the colloquial

    No wonder the Human Biodiversity types make you all look like a bunch of idiots to you guys , R is just a letter in the alphabet and NumPy is a misspelling.

    Non-sequitur, this does not apply to those who don’t understand or have not studied such.

    Its the only way guys like you could possibly think that a hypothesis test is an appeal to authority.

    To assume that “psychologists and the statisticians have done their best to verify and falsify their claims using the usually hypothesis testing” is an appeal to authority, assuming that they haven’t been cooking their data [http://pss.sagepub.com/content/22/11/1359].

    Or that you could think that ‘truth’ has any validity inn the context of science.

    I don’t, science is only one method (and limited at that) to finding out provisional truth, absolute truth only comes from divine grace and revelation.

    All experiments are tentative, til the next paradigm shift, or someone does better. It used to be true that light was a wave, then it became a particle, now its somewhere between the two.

    Light is actually two particulate waves, one moving along the x-axis and the other along the y, both axes simultaneously intersecting at right angles and propagating along the z-axis.

  72. ChazIng on said:

    But isn’t hat the thing with guys like you? Using all them big words like ‘effete’, without knowing how to put it in a damn sentence, or making words like ‘homosexualize.’

    Effete is not a big word but perhaps it is for you. I didn’t create the word “homosexualize” [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/homosexualize], not that there is anything wrong with creating new words.

    Lemme guess, you probably didn’t go to college or have a degree in some useless subject they made up to get money from you. So you think using them big words will make you sound like a real ‘scientific analyst’, Amirite?

    Ad hominem for the fourth time, I have a degree in electrical and computer engineering and presently completing a thesis for a masters in petroleum engineering. Perhaps you could share your stellar education?

    You could have at least scientifically analyzed that procreation doesn’t require sexual arousal or sexual intercourse, and intercourse can be done without being aroused by the person you’re sexing (you should know all about this.)

    Why would I need to analyze this? Of what applicability is this? As long as a man performs heterosexually, he has engaged in performative heterosexuality. He cannot then claim to be a natural born homosexual. He may claim to be confused or pressured by society or in transition.

    I don’t know. Who’s to say all those guys having homosex in prison and the military won’t re-transition to homosexuality when they resiume their normal heterosexual lives?

    Exactly, thus studies on supposed homosexuals and bisexuals who performed heterosexual intercourse to make children and are now raising their own progeny are all effete.

    Yep, you’ve proven that you’re a dumbass. I win.

    Right, unlike uneducated me, you went to college and studied science and learnt how to mock and declare yourself an argumentative winner, smh.

    To recap: studies which use men who had sex with women and made children (but then transitioned to bisexuality or homosexuality) cannot be used to show that their children are not affected by their sexuality because of their prior heterosexuality. The fact that they were aroused enough to perform penile-vaginal sex is enough (in and of itself) to make effete any studies using such data.

  73. ChazIng on said:

    From Robert Gagnon PhD (Associate Professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary), a reply to a critical email which is applicable to this discussion:

    Regarding your Jim Crow attempted analogy, I find it to be a lame attempt at analogical reasoning to compare the 100% heritable, immutable, and nonbehavioral feature of race to a behaviorally oriented sexual desire that is not 100% heritable and, at least within a limited sense (so Kinsey Institute) is susceptible to fluctuation along the Kinsey spectrum in the course of life, an impulse incidentally to engage in a behavior that is incompatible with embodied existence, anatomically and physiologically.

    http://www.robgagnon.net/AnswersToEMails.htm

  74. ATTENTION:

    Since this post took on a life of it’s own and became something sinister, ALL comments are now closed on this thread.

  75. Reneegede on said:

    Reblogged this on Black Write & Read.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: