Many people like to claim homosexuality is common in the animal kingdom. They always cite the same single study done by amateurs from a college institution that claimed they found cases of homosexuality in over 1000 species. However, they fail to acknowledge that even in these animals homosexuality is only rarely, if not occasionally practiced and only in desperation or practice. Humans are the only animals that practice the sexuality as a lifestyle. animals do not go out intentionally seeking same sex partners. I have nothing against homosex but I am just tired of people pushing it in my face. They seem to think homosexuality should define a person's entire character. Their identity is strictly faggots and nothing else. no personality. no reason.
Is homosexuality unnatural?
also there is no gay gene no matter how much they say its their blood.
Me on the left
my dog likes to shag the couch pillow, does that make him couchophile or something ?
>humans are like animals
Male animals fuck each other to display dominance and make the dominated male unwanted by females
Me in the middle. Next time ill bring my stallion ok ;)?
usually gay acts in animals is due to defects in the perception of pheromonal signals
they're effectively just confused thinking they're humping a female
>leaf
I heard this once:
"Natural is an illusion. What's natural to the spider is chaos to the fly"
Homosexuality is almost inexistent.
Animals are more bisexual or pansexual, they just want to fuck.
Do you know any case of an animal that refuses to have sex with the other gender but fucks his own?
gay is diseased and defective. when we think about nature it's usually healthy organisms and the way they function. Gay is definitely none of this. There is a lot of suffering and ill in nature though.
Appeal to nature is a fallacy. Benis goes into bagina.
>if it happends in nature its ok
So in nature tigers eat their young, should i eat my kids for breakfast then?
OP, it's ok. We'll still love you just the same.
That pic is just like humans where male homosexuals become so depraved and addicted to demonic hedonism they develop the urge to rape children.
Homosexuality has always been a mark of the devil. It's why all the major religions have identified it as a grave disorder. It shows how badly besieged the church is that its leaders are going out of their way to praise demons made flesh.
I can accept if im wrong. after all, human intelligence doesn't seem natural to begin with,
its may be natural for tigers but not for people. generally homosexuality is unnatural in all species
>do examples of stupid animals fucking other stupid animals mean homos are "natural"
No. Of course it doesn't. Given the opportunity EVERY animal will choose the opposite sex to mate with.
I'm not homosex. I'm just fed up with these people. They are an oddity and the majority should not need to comply to their demands.
You don't have to protest that hard. We understand.
Am gay, can confirm. Redpill of sexuality t b h. Bi probably is the actual red pill but whatever. Their ain't no genetics, thats stupid and only a pseud would claim it.
1/2
Everything points to homosexuality simply being a sort of social third gender which is an entity in all societies, in some to greater extents than others for a myriad of different psychological factors. If homosexuality was a biological imperative, which let me remind you there is no evidence of, how would one explain the changes in the prevalence of homosexuality throughout time? Have we evolved from ancient Greek and Roman peoples who would be seen as effeminate if they didn't bugger another man? Or did our societies simply develop and change?
Pointing to deer and dogs and saying it must be a natural imperative because non-humans do it is a call to nature fallacy. It stands to reason that if homosexuality can manifest within the simplest of human societies then the very rudimentary one's of the animal kingdom should be able to produce the same aberrations in their loose communities.
Many humans become gay because they fail as a male to attract affection from females and respect from males. So they get affection from females in the form of a gay best friend relationship and respect from males because they can just call anyone who doesn't applaud their narcissistic flaunting of their sexuality as homophobic, which they must accept because women will back up their GBFs and deny the males sex.
Similarly in the animal kingdom, gamma males often pair off with each other in a wolf pack to give each other sexual gratification and communal affection which is monopolised by the Alpha and Betas. They must do this because only the Alphas of the pack can breed without their pups being eaten or themselves ostracised and denied food and protection.
These are just two very specific examples of why some people and some animals practice homosexuality. To trivialise the causes to a catch all answer ,biological/natural imperative, one must ignore the vast intricate systems which humans and animals create which aren't written in our DNA. societies and miasmic economies within both nature and the human realm are largely separate, and so form entities and aberrations which are not determined by genetics or instinct but by societal psychology relative to the context.
>because pounding boipussi is equivalent to murdering children
Christcucks said that homosexuality was a "crime against nature". So, scientists studied incidences of it in nature. Now, Christcucks say "b-b-but just because it happens in nature doesn't m-m-mean it's o-o-okayy!!!!"
Get BTFO, shift goalposts, repeat.
"Unnatural" in this context doesn't mean what you think it means. For one, the "naturalness" doesn't apply to non-rational animals.
Omega male*
Exclusive homosexuality is not seen. Bisexualism for pleasure is seen. Pure homosexuality is a genetic defect.
Animals do it under stress. It is a sexual mistake, one that even the animals can make. The process of evolution is not a perfect process with set goals.
Well what is 'natural' - something that occurs without human intervention?
Things like downs are 'naturally' occuring defects, but they're still exactly that - defects.
It really doesn't matter if homosexuality (i.e. denying reproduction and ending your ancestors' 1000s of years of history) is natural or not. It's a defect and shouldn't be normalised.
I'm gay most people have mental disorder I think only 1% of gay men (who cares about dykes) are reasonable. The rest - their identity is being gay.
a fucking prostitute moved in to the apartment adjoining mine. pretty sure its not homo, but i needed to post this bullshit.
giving it a couple weeks before i call the cops
you might be right but that still doesn't justify its normalization here in the west. 2bh dont care if someones gay as long as the keep it to themselves.
...
i get a lot of attention from women, i just like getting fucked too
>Be Me
>7 Years Old
>I have Cat , her name is Fluffy
>Fluffy is pregnant
>Fluffy Gives Birth to a still born dead fetus
>Fluffy Eats the Fetus
>Eating Dead Babies is natural in the animal kingdom
>Lets all eat fetuses
tiger's also eat their young btw
Whenever someone tells me this in an argument, that "it occurs in nature" its easy to retort that so does rape and murder.
Sup Forums is unnatural, and yet we are still shitposting
lololololololololololololololololol
so?
dolphins also fuck for pleasure, but thats the only species except for humans
so liking men has nothing to do with having a hard time with women
>Natural = Life affirming behaviour
>Unnatural = Otherwise Natural behaviour resulting in death(a natural state)
This is what has always been meant by the term. Being Autistic about it, is just playing the Marxist's word games.
We are not animals OP, we have the ability to use our rational minds to surpress our biological impulses. Gay acceptance and sexual liberation was a ploy to weaken society and make people slaves to their basest instincts.
Your first post made me think you weren't going to be a massive retard but here you are. Fag here. Banged a fair amount of girls, generally enjoyed it. Have had the opportunity a couple times recently and honestly thought about it but decided not to. Also I am no token gay. You would never guess my homo nature if you met me guaranteed. You're right that it is a myriad of things. But in the end, I just don't feel required to be straight, don't want kids, and never met a woman who was smart enough to spend my whole life with. Maybe ones out there, but till than I'm still gay. I also like dick, but again, no pressure to be straight and the prostate is a god send.
So fuck off with your made up sexuality hierarchy and enjoy getting cucked.
Humans are also the only animals that can read and think and moralize and shitpost
>sticking your dick in a mans butt
>then sometimes stick your dick in a vagina
>IM SO REDPILLED YOU GUYS!!!
I hate your type of faggots more than the glitter fairy fagots.
it's a pileup, thats hillarious.
Homosexuality occurs in nature. So does pedophelia, cannibalism, infanticide, mass murder, incest rape, gang rape, vanilla rape, and necrophelia.
Just because something occurs in nature and is thus """natural""" doesn't make it acceptable.
...
I didn't say all gays. Your personal experience doesn't represent all gays. I even said that it was just one example of many different processes a society as complex as ours can create.
>dogs eat shit
>therefore it's natural and healthy for humans to eat shit too
lol k
thats gotta be one of the funniest picks i've seen in a while.
seeAt least try to read to the end
Don't an incredible amount straight people define themselves quite a bit from their sexuality? I define myself as a husband to my wife. That is one of the keystones to my identity.
All you fucking retards always say "w-well it's fine if those fags don't rub it in my face" but you literally interpret any display of affection as such
fuck off
I remember that article. The study was done buy Swedes who openly admitted there was a political agenda and therefore bias in their works.
i'm american i can't read that many words at once
Your right, missed the last paragraph somehow.
>To trivialise the causes to a catch all answer ,biological/natural imperative, one must ignore the vast intricate systems which humans and animals create which aren't written in our DNA. societies and miasmic economies within both nature and the human realm are largely separate, and so form entities and aberrations which are not determined by genetics or instinct but by societal psychology relative to the context.
Good point, and I agree there are gays who default on gay because of pressures like you described. It's even worse when you look at people who have real problems but default to trans or some shit instead of trying to find a way to be comfortable in reality. Honestly, in a society where reproduction is definitely not the main goal for every individual, bisexual is the masterrace hands down. Straight is a solid default for the most obvious reasons, its functional. Monosexuals are like vegetarians who won't even eat meat if they are hungry and it's about to be wasted. I'm like a vegetarian who like veggies a lot but will eat meat when it looks dank.
Btw not a veg, meat is always dank.
>what is the Appeal to Nature Fallacy?
Read the fucking sticky.
Most non intelligent animals have no actual sexual preference. They'll fuck whatever. Typically, in the case of homosexuality, it's to pound the lesser male into submission so they don't have the strength to chase a female.
In the case of more intelligent animals, like dolphins. You see more sexual preferences, some dolphins prefer gay sex, some like to rape small fish to death and then fuck the corpse and eat it. Some dolphins try to jump on human women and rape them. Nature is fucked up
Gays is more acceptable and doesn't hurt nobody.
I used the example because I came dangerously close to falling into it. If not for familial influences I would have even taken the trans pill at one point. And even now, getting /fit/ I can understand why some men simply don't respect women as much because they can never empathise with a man's physical struggle.
I'm straight for the same reason I am not a paedophile. I'm not saying they are morally relevant to each other just that my motivations are related.
I wont sexualize a minor because I know that for her to have the best chance in life she must be sheltered from explicit sexuality until around 16-21 as the trial and error of society has figured out as it developed. I may be sexually attracted to them on a biological level, but I make the distinction for the sake of her and the community at large she will eventually contribute too, whether for good or ill.
Likewise I reject homosexuality, even though I believe I could accept it for myself on basic premise. Because I not only find a life complimented by the strengths of a female to be more fulfilling than that of a male, even if we men understand each other more easily, and I want the gratification of raising a family to the best of my ability. Also, this goal is a great motivator. I reuse to settle for less than what I want in a woman, and that dream woman would not accept less from me either, so I must make damn sure that I'm ready when I meet her. For the sake of my happiness, for her happiness and for the success and happiness of our children I am morally obligated.
Are you checking out Sup Forums from /fit/ or /lgbt/? It's not often I talk to outright gays willing to discuss the politics around themselves on here. just traps and bipucci memes.
>Stick your dick in nothing
The "naturalness" of any thing is a spook.
Get over yourself, burger. Come up with actual arguments or fuck off.
I can understand that completely. Goals are goals. I'm from /out/ so you can imagine I live more for me and enjoy solitude and all that shit, and you can imagine having a male partner in an /out/ lifestyle has it's merits. I very much think the trans movement is a trap, similar to the one that exists in a lesser extent in far left homosexuality. You can do it, your certainly allowed, and there are will always be people happy to be a hon or whatever and good for them but a lot of people look at it as a last resort for being sick of their body and masculinity issues. I can very much see falling for that trap, but it makes me sad how many people come out the other side in worse shape. Just be you, and you are you, don't need to slice anything off or conform to 'feminine' conceptions.
I would say don't limit yourself if you agree that you are capable of enjoying extended sexuality. It doesn't take away from your goals, but if you can eat meat, eat it sometimes if you want. My vegetarian analogy is starting to get unintentionally lewd.
Also /lgbt/ is a shithole echo chamber for legitimately mentally ill people or soon to be mentally ill people. Pretty damn toxic, made me depressed when I used to visit.
Hardly glittery or fairy. Seems rational enough. Have preference, not limiting oneself, what the fuck ever.
I very much enjoyed your input. But from my own army days I very much believe the nature of social interactions between men and women should be kept separate. Men are robust, hardy and reliable within their fraternal bonds. With these men I have probably been closer than anyone else on earth as we went through thick and thin, both professionally as soldiers and personally as friends.
These relationships I will never forget, but to sexualize those whom I shared them with instead of simply admire them holds no meaning to me. Not so much the Victorian sentiment that coitus should be saved purely for procreation, but that for me as an individual, to successfully contribute to a community I must procreate, If I contribute to the future generations population i have a vested interest in the success of the community and they in me in the interest of there own children. If I happen to enjoy sex, which I damn well do, then all the better, but for the long run in investing in my own human capital. Homosexuality, as I perceive it, is a stale investment to a community. I also believe people need to categorise the way they generally feel about members of the different sexes within society to create a comprehensive world view, especially at a younger age to properly comprehend the questions they will face on their own sexuality later on in their life.
I suppose the general point I'm trying to make is that sex can be used as an investment for one's self with much greater returns if done heterosexually. Both in a healthy relationship with a woman who compliments my own masculine attributes with her feminine attributes and also ensuring we and our children have a successful relationship with the community that has a vested interest in our success. Unless gays adopt, it is not the communities problem if they are gay, they are not going to be contributing to the make up of the population in the future generations.
Yeah i understand, I saw brokeback mountain ;^)
>who doesn't applaud their narcissistic flaunting of their sexuality as homophobic, which they must accept because women will back up their GBFs and deny the males sex
And men a hundred years ago were therefore gay because they liked the thrill of maybe getting killed if it comes out?
see
I really never understood this. And ive tried. Hard.
"Its unnatural!"
Not an argument.
"Its disease ridden!"
Not your problem.
"Theyre all pedophiles!"
Pure fuckin autism. Go outside.
"Muh god says its wrong!"
No one cares.
"But theyre sexually loose!"
Not your problem.
"But the gay agenda!"
Then stop making it fucking political.
I wouldn't exactly consider the animal world a left-winger's dream
>binary genders
>gender roles
>sex=gender
>have to fight to fuck or maybe even eat
>homogeneous societies
>fathers
>have to constantly be on the move in order to eat and not be eaten
there isnt a gay gene but it is natural. Its a mental illness.
>wahh why can't I have sex with other men
pretty gay desu
Tell your homo friends that just because it's natural for a dog to hump your leg doesn't mean it's natural for Chad and Steve to hump your leg.
...
>Homosexuality, as I perceive it, is a stale investment to a community.
You're not wrong. I don't really consider my sexuality as any sort of investment though. I basically hope to contribute to society in some intellectual way, to share the things I learn living as I please to hopefully the benefit of mankind in some way. That said, if I die before then, no sweat off my back. That's just a philosophical choice.
You're right that it would be weird to sexualize those relationships. I've never hit on a straight guy for that reason. It has to be a like minded approach and feminine characteristics, which we all hold to some extent regardless of gender, probably does come into play. It's like letting your guard down or something, I haven't really delved into that concept much. I very much respect you're view, a lot of people will think any deviation from their own path is negative without even wondering how they ended up on that path. If you can consider the other ways of looking at the coin but still have a preference you are further than most men.
As for the adoption thing, I have no idea what effect a homo couple would have on raising a kid. There are differences in men and women, culturally and physically, that come into play there. The only articles I've seen supporrting it come from HuffPo which is usually a pretty degenerate way of looking at it (I mean, trans kids at 3? Come on now, that kid might have to 'come out' as straight and male). That said, with """normal""" fags raising a kid, I could see it working out ok, great men have been raised with less.
Never seen brokeback mountain, seemed too gay.
whether or not it's natural (occurs in the animal kingdom and/or people have a genetic or biological predisposition towards it),
or nutured (developed over time due to social & environmental circumstances),
or socially constructed (internalized by representing it as being the case);
is all irrelevant to whether or not it's good or bad. concluding that it's good or bad based on the nature or causal origins
is either the naturalistic fallacy or the genetic fallacy. both of those fallacies share the same form (non-sequitor).
also, the argument from animal dominance is ad hoc and doesn't preclude homosexuality as an orientation
i don't care if you're a faggot, just don't be one of those obnoxious tumblr lgbtqialmnop faggots who centres their whole life around being a faggot
being a faggot isn't the same as being a stereotypical fairy snow-flake "oppressed" by the system, it has nothing to do with your gender identity or social circumstances
it just means you're attracted to the same sex
no one cares, or at least, they shouldn't
How does my post say that?