/fa/ - Fashion

>>10034953
The rallies blossomed into something disgusting and degenerate and lost sight of the real purposes. So no.

I don't give two shits if you wanna fuck men, though. People turned a mole hill into a fucking mountain over it while the TPP is quietly sneaking by.

>>10034965
/thread

>>10034965
this

>>10034965
That's what I thought but I'd never say it out loud. They seem extremely obnoxious and in-your-face

>>10034953
From a visual standpoint they look tacky

Do Americans ever rally against bombing people?

>>10035021
No, they only rally over trivial social issues.
Anything of any real consequence is only discussed in Washington.

>>10035021
pls don't derail thread anon :(

>>10034990
Yeah, and it can be comforting as hell.
One of the things I saw growing up in a homophobic area, were gay pride parades in the city. Here's not only one flaming faggot, but a whole block of them, not only left alone, but having a great time. I wasn't half as flaming as those faggots, so I imagined what an easier time I was about to come into, if I could just hold out until then.

Pride parades are more for the gays than straights.

>>10035065
Fellow fag here.

Them "having a great time" is degrading to me as a homosexual.
The LGBT movement has ceased to actually be about gay pride or rights. It has evolved, essentially, into the next wave of the free love movement.
What was originally supposed to be a rally showing that we are perfectly viable members of society has been twisted and perverted to the point of being a degenerate, exhibitionist, hedonistic display of immaturity and closed minded stupidity.
And, on top of all of that, the other gay people I've encountered (aside from my partner) have been some of the most reprehensible, close-minded, and bigoted people I've ever met.

Being a faggot is not effay

>>10034953

literally not at all. as a gay man, i fucking despise flamboyance. flamboyance is the vestigial arm that brings filth and disease into the gay community

>>10035124
>The LGBT movement has ceased to actually be about gay pride or rights. It has evolved, essentially, into the next wave of the free love movement.
No, it hasn't. The movement is much more than the parades, which were always revelrous.

>What was originally supposed to be a rally showing that we are perfectly viable members of society has been twisted and perverted to the point of being a degenerate, exhibitionist, hedonistic display of immaturity and closed minded stupidity.
Nigga, what? No, the rallies were that. The parade was from the start a celebration to commemorate the Stonewall Riots; a bunch of flamming faggots throwing shit.

>And, on top of all of that, the other gay people I've encountered (aside from my partner) have been some of the most reprehensible, close-minded, and bigoted people I've ever met.
Being gay doesn't preclude you from being shitty.

>>10035132
Why are you here

>>10035134
>>10035124
Exactly, flaming gay dudes are so rude and offensive but it gets written off because they're oh so sassy and fun. I don't get easily offended and I'm not gay, it's just like people use homosexuality as an excuse to be obnoxious af

>>10035142
>No, it hasn't. The movement is much more than the parades, which were always revelrous.
Explain what more there is to it at this point, then?

>Nigga, what? No, the rallies were that. The parade was from the start a celebration to commemorate the Stonewall Riots; a bunch of flamming faggots throwing shit.
And you're okay with them perpetuating and living a stereotype that alienates us from everyone else, and lowers many moral standards of the culture?

>Being gay doesn't preclude you from being shitty.
I never said it did.

>>10035149
because I'm not a faggot

>>10035155
It's not a moral downgrade just because you say it is. That's not objective.

>>10035065
Your response interests me because I always assumed the point of the rallies was to raise awareness, and push for social change by being visible to ordinary people? I cannot help but think that by that criteria, they must be counterproductive, as the average Joe doesn't like obnoxiousness or things being shoved down his throat. But if, as you say, the parades are more for the gays, then I must wonder whether the cost of alienating people is worth the benefits?
>>10035124
Really interesting, thanks
>>10035134
I am gay and also despise it. Though I've heard others say that without flamboyance, finding other homosexuals would be far more difficult. I'm not sure what to think about that.

>>10034965
/thread

>>10035185
I'm assuming you meant to reply to >>10035160

I didn't say it was a moral downgrade, and I never said that moral standards are objective.
I said that they lower the moral standards within the culture, which they do. Moral standards not being something objective, but being something well established and functional.
As a result of the LGBT community (and other influences, I admit), there are many things accepted in society today that weren't before.
Some are good, in my opinion, like gay marriage.
But others, like the decline of monogamy, have very obvious parallels with the growing LGBT culture, which I do not think will benefit society in the long term.

And, as a result of this decline, I can't help but worry that we're riding the slippery slope.
What will the next wave of our acceptance and bombardment on the culture be?
Acceptance of bestiality? Pedophilia?

I'm afraid of what's to come.

>>10034965
did you just post in the /v/ thread

i saw that exact same sentiment in that thread

>>10035065
>it can be comforting as hell.

You mean "it can be autistic as hell"

>>10034965
To be honest the leather daddies and topless Dykes are actually a pretty small part of the parade. It's mostly pretty boring with people like OPs pic, but the news wants something eyecatching, so you just see legions of leather daddies riding on chariots made of twinks.

>>10034953
I'm torn.

On one hand, rallies of any kind are mindless me-too level bullshit. It's not making a point, it's just trying to be a bit annoying enough to gander attention. It's like lining up and herding through fucking D.C. like a bunch of cows.

And then I remember how many people buy shit like Supreme mindlessly because they want the logo.

So basically rallies are /fa/ without the fashion.

>>10036988
what he said

homosexuals are mentally ill and should be recognised as the society eroding scum that they are.

>>10037190
i have a theory that homosexuals the next step in evolution

opposed to heterosexuals who have a high chance of having accidental children, gays have zero chance of having accidental children

they can choose to adopt, be inseminated, or have a surrogate mother when they are financially stable enough to have a child.

gays are the only chance we have in stopping the Idiocracy from being fulfilled.

>>10037224
you should keep the theory to yourself because it reads like something a character in the movie idiocracy would say. in fact its so fucking stupid i am not even going to point out why its so fucking stupid, it should be self evident.

dont post again.

>>10037224
that's actually..

huh

>>10037224
I was actually just thinking about what the next step in evolution would be. I don't think it would be homosexuality but I was thinking of sex without reproduction.

Interesting idea.

>>10037256
>sex without reproduction
>evolution

are you people real

Now that it's accepted it just not cool any more. Have to find something more on fringe.

>>10037267
try fucking a dog you moron :^)

Gay people annoy the absolute fuck out of me with all their flamboyant, high pitched, feminine shit they spew. I've met a couple of nice gay people who weren't faggots, but the general LGBT community is a bunch of raving, bigoted, close-minded cunts who are hypocritical fuckfaces.

>>10037256
i think thats the idea of the pill. evolution might be slowing down because of all the medicine and shit imo. the male pill is coming out soon too.

>>10035209
imagine that a huge part of your romantic relationships you have had to hide; going for a walk your uncomfortable holding your partners hand, going for dinner your uncomfortable looking to intimate, you cant tell friends and family about your love. Gay pride parades is showing that were not afraid, they are so over the top because each gay individual involved is now in a safe, accepting environment that they may have never felt before.

Its not so much about wanting others to accept us it's got more to do with us being able to accept ourselves and not have to hide our identity.

They may seem excessively flamboyant but its like when you turn 21, you don't have one beer and go to bed, you go out and party for a week. Gay pride parades are like being 21 for a day and hence showing that part of your identity is magnified

>>10037318
He said he was gay you cockmunching mong. He's the perfect example of a normal, well adjusted homosexual. He's the kind of gay person anyone would accept and invite to go out with. Flamboyant faggots like you are the reason you aren't accepted. Try and be normal, you dont have to not kiss in public, you can hold hands, just dont wear fucking rainbow clothes and try to be normal.

>>10037377
I dont think you understand what its like to be on the other side of the fence. You're right, I can hold hands and kiss in public, but you get stares, occasionally people will even voice their opinion about your actions to you. Its not illegal for same sex couples to show PDA but it is uncomfortable.

Im sorry you find 'flamboyant faggots' annoying and are unable to accept them but I find you and your attitudes annoying. We have a culture and identity that we would like to celebrate and we will do so without your approval because its not about you. Pride is not about assimilating it is about not being ashamed of our culture. We should not have to change to be allowed to live in peace.

>>10037404
people are staring because its their natural reaction to an unnatural behavior, you arent normal.

faggotry and homosexual anal sex and deprivation will never be normal or accepted.

enjoy these last 10-20 years of decadence you'll be afforded in the west, once the pendulum swings back faggots will be back where they belong.

>>10037421
>unnatural behavior

this is literally a meaningless phrase. everything that exists is inherently natural. nothing exists outside of nature, not even human activity.

because of this, whether or not something is natural is a terrible ethical test. because nothing isn't natural.

>>10037275
They live and feed off social media and liberal journalism.

It's their breeding ground and it's disgusting to have them try brainwash the younger generation through the Internet(mostly social media)
I could see why so many people are concerned.

>>10037454
>this is the mental gymnastics liberals and faggots employ to justify an act that evokes revulsion in the majority of the populace

we're here to breed, to procreate, no baby will be born from the unholy union of your dick and your faggot boyfriend's asshole, it is an unnatural aberration that defies natural darwinism.

science is out on faggots, but the majority of fags have suffered sexual or physical abuse or trauma in childhood, only 10% of faggots have what is identified as the 'gay gene', the majority of you are nothing more than broken fetishists.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11501300

>Forty-six percent of the homosexual men in contrast to 7% of the heterosexual men reported homosexual molestation

>>10037470
>mental gymnastics

literally that's what you're doing by trying to define some things that exist as natural, and some things that exist as unnatural.

nature is the totality of existence. there's nothing outside of it.

all human behavior is natural. all that "natural" means is that it exists.

the idea that humans are somehow separate from or outside of nature is the true cognitive dissonance of our species. it's a shame that you drank the kool-aid.

>>10037497
nice argument

a sign is not a sign and 2+2=9

>>10037510

u wot m8.

can you even read? your strawman examples don't even clash with my argument in the manner you've been trying to clash with it.

here let me break it down for you son.

if you say that my argument is akin to "a sign is not a sign" or "2+2=9" then you are essentially claiming that it's invalid by way of contradiction.

let's remember that validity does not in and of itself result in soundness, but that it is a requirement for soundness. you meant to attack my argument in terms of soundness, but you're so fucking stupid that you tried to attack it on validity instead.

let "nature" be the set of all things that exist.
"human activity" exists.
therefore, human activity exists within the set "nature".

perfectly valid. you're fucking stupid. you should have attacked soundness. you'd still be wrong, but at least you'd be going about being wrong in the right way.

>>10037527
did you say something

sorry i wont engage you in faux-intellegentsia, commie, reductionist, postmodernist jewish discourse, im not interested in a philosophical debate about homosexuality.

hows first year of university going though? getting your sociology degree?

So doesn't this violate the 10th amendment?

I thought the states were the ones in charge of marriage laws

>>10037538

>he made a logical argument
>i'd better shit on logic by associating it with early college
>that makes his logical argument false!!!!

sad, predictable, and still not making any meaningful clash.

you can slap on any 'insult' you'd like to your posts. that doesn't create an argument.

your disengagement is surrender.

>>10037538
>postmodernist jewish discourse
Fool went straight Athens on you. Nothing postmodern about it

>>10037546
there was never any engagement, he/you is attempting to create a framework in which a 'logical' discussion of the validity of homosexuality can be proven/disproved by defining and setting terms, im not and never was interested in this kind of structure; because im a pragmatist with a working set of testicles and i dont subscribe to postmodern jewry's idea of what constitutes critical thinking/discourse, anything i say will be grounded in empirical reality.

faggots are unhealthy and evil, fact. get it, good?

>>10037554
lol

>>10037554
>anything i say will be grounded in empirical reality.

actually what you've been saying is only grounded in your ethical judgements ABOUT empirical reality.

empirical reality exists without any value judgements attached. it also does not support any value judgements.

for example, if there is a chair, an empirically supported statement would be: there is a chair.

anything beyond that breaks away from empiricism. any statement of "it's good that there is a chair" or "there should be more chairs" or "this chair is the best chair" etc. is not supported by empirical evidence. you now have to make value judgements as a critical being in order to support statements like that.

questions of validity and soundness have absolutely nothing to do with judaism or postmodernism. in fact, postmodernism questions formal logic if anything.

you're uninformed about philosophy and critical thinking. read up.

ill see all you Bay Area /fa/gs at pride tomorrow in the city

>>10037569
yeh but what does any of that have to do with the price of tea in china? you keep trying to tell me the rules of a game im not interested in playing.

you can keep trying to draw me into a 'philosophical debate' using dialect your marxist professor taught you, but im not interested, you're a faggot after all, or a fag enabler - wasting time farting off ad hoc justifications for his own faggotry with his shiny new toolset of wikipedia stamped 'philosophy' that you're so desperate to show me.

i am sure the children here will be impressed, especially the other faggots, i just think you're a big fag pedant.

>>10037610
its normal, its healthy, its natural ;)

>>10037610
>not interested in playing

then why are you playing?

you named your code--empiricism. i addressed this. there's your tea price.

the rest of your post is a long-winded ad hominem.

>>10037612
you don't get it, do you?

>natural

does not give you any information about how to make a value judgement.

>>10037612

i know kids will be kids, but this is a little much


This is defnitely a parenting fault. Not saying the kid dancing like that is anyones fault as lots of kids dance like crazy hyper coke heads, but the parents should have stepped in and stopped the weird performance.


If random people were video taping my son doing something potentially embarrassing I'm gunna shut down that shit so fast

>>10037613
>>10037617

You lost anon.

It's time to pack your bags and leave.

>>10037497
>all human behavior is natural. all that "natural" means is that it exists.

this is not what natural means

you cannot understand the importance of "naturalness" to the English speaker without acknowledging its emphasis on the proper relations between all things in a universal order; that what is natural is opposed to what is unnatural, or abomination,or corruption. This is a sense that comes down to us from our ancestors who believed that there were ways of behaving which were natural and proper, because they believed that God made this world and had certain designs for us. It is for this reason that in Johnson's dictionary he gives this as one definition of nature:

Natural affection, or reverence; native sensations.

Have we not seen
The murd'ring son ascend his parent's bed,
Thro' violated nature force his way,
And stain the sacred womb where once he lay? Pope.

We have not lost this sense when we speak of what is "natural"—it almost means "normal", but with the difference that it can never be accidental because it is innate.

>>10037540
Another win for Federal power.

>>10037639

lmao you're a joke dude. you essentially rattled off a bunch of insults, tried to loosely attach your view to empiricism without understanding empiricism, and then said "lol i don't have to respond" to every raised objection.

you summarily lost. simply sticking to your talking points and not addressing objections except to insult the objectors does not support a viewpoint or argument at all.

>>10037659

i'm not terribly interested in lay-understandings of a word.

natur-al

al as a suffix meaning of or pertaining to.

what is not of nature?

lol. i swear to god, gays will find any reason to party and prance around in the streets. oh well, at least its not like a giant nigger march where we have to be worried about violence and cars being burned.

>>10037538
holy shit you're fucking retarded

>>10037669
>i'm not terribly interested in lay-understandings of a word.

Then you're not interested in understanding what it is you're arguing against.

And it's not a layman's understanding, it's well enough documented in the OED and one can find plenty of precedent in the major poets.

>>10037663
im not the anon, sorry the audience doesnt follow/isnt interested in your particular brand of relativism.

whenever some nubile young cuck fresh from the communist indoctrination facility now known as college comes at me trying to redefine the very obvious apparatus of 'natural' in this context any sane person will recognise said cuck as a big old waste of time, you're just plain silly and disingenuous.

>>10037659
puts eloquently enough, and more adequately and succinctly than a peabrained poo lipped fag like you deserves.

sodomy is not natural
necrophilia is not natural
baby rape is not natural
not all things humans do are we naturally predisposed to do doing.

if early man were all faggots, you wouldnt be here today - that is what is implied, and you know that - you just thought you'd take this as an opportunity to wax philosophically, no one is impressed.

>i'm not terribly interested in lay-understandings of a word

thats why no one cares about what you have to say, and thats why you and you ilk are doomed to extinction.

>>10037669
Okay let me break down your sweet argument

1. Nature is everything that exists
2. Anything that exists is, by its existence, "natural"
3. To say homosexuality is unnatural is to say that it does not exist
4. Homosexuality cannot be unnatural

Alright now let me ask you something

Do you think your opponents are trying to argue that homosexuality does not exist?

Or do you think they have a different definition of "nature" to which your argument does not speak?

>>10037610

How high do you have to BE to get this rekt???

>>10037695
its over, terrorists lose.

>>10037695

If they think that it's ethically or morally wrong, then they should own their ethical judgements.

Clarity is key. I think xyz is ethically wrong.

If you say I think xyz is unnatural, that's something else entirely.

I understand what you're saying--we're using two different definitions of natural. I think my definition is superior, because it is more honest.

If anon thinks that xyz is unethical, anon should not try to shield that ethical judgement behind a claim as to what nature is supposed to be. Because how the fuck is anyone going to know what nature is SUPPOSED to be like, or if it is supposed to be like anything at all?

If we talk about these claims as they actually are, as ethical claims, then we have a clearer foundation for making value judgements.

>>10037732
>how the fuck is anyone going to know what nature is SUPPOSED to be like

>>10037751

a baby is born with x feature.
a baby is not born with x feature.

is one of those babies not a product of nature?

>>10037695

>Or do you think they have a different definition of "nature" to which your argument does not speak?

if their definition of "natural" is something other than "of nature" (literally natur-al), then there's a word out there that better suits that definition.

if you go around and say "the sky is red"
and i say "no the sky is blue"
and you say "but by red, i secretly meant blue, therefore i'm right"

that's not fucking useful.

>>10037762
>homosexuality is genetic
>still attempting to frame the debate within the umbrella of 'everything that humans do is natural' despite this intellectually dishonest nonsense being trashed like it deserved.

just die already

>>10037732
He has not been masking his ethical judgment. Your mistake is to say that ethical judgment is "xyz is wrong", that it is strictly "value" judgment. Ethics are concerned largely with how we ought to live and respond to particular situations. This entails a lot of speculation about consequences, which are generally material.

Of course saying "xyz is unnatural" is an ethical judgment. But it is an ethical judgment which relies on assumptions about effects of action which deviates from a desirable norm. Many of his points aren't convincing, but you cannot expect someone to make a really sound argument in a 4chan post.

>>10037774
You are assuming that the adjective must derive from a particular modern sense of "nature" which is not as widely accepted as you think it is. You should really reconsider being so bold about not knowing the history of the word or seeing the complexity of its meaning. There is nothing secret about what "nature" means, though you may be ignorant of it.

>>10037783

i never said anything about homosexuality being genetic. i was asking a clarifying question about your conception of natural.

if, to you, "natural" means something other than "part of nature", then the onus to spell out what you mean is on you.

otherwise why are you even participating in the discussion?

essentially your argument has boiled down to:

you should not endorse nor engage in something that is not natural
homosexuality is not natural
therefore you should not engage in it, nor endorse it
oh, but by "natural" i secretly mean some ethical standard that i will not explain

plus a mountain of

haha you're a leftist/commie/fag-enabler/blah-blah

do you see how everything you said is fucking useless?

>>10037789
>There is nothing secret about what "nature" means, though you may be ignorant of it.

There really is, though. Unless used as advised in my strict definition, then its usage history essentially boils down to "anything that the user doesn't like is an abomination".

>>10037802
You are now reduced to prescribing new meanings for words to support your argument.

Hypocrisy of a pathetic variety.

My secret meaning is everywhere.

"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."

"I hate when vice can bolt her arguments,
And vertue has no tongue to check her pride:
Impostor do not charge most innocent nature,
As if she would her children should be riotous
With her abundance, she good cateress
Means her provision onely to the good
That live according to her sober laws,
And holy dictate of spare Temperance:
If every just man that now pines with want
Had but a moderate and beseeming share
Of that which lewdly-pamper'd Luxury
Now heaps upon som few with vast excess,
Natures full blessings would be well dispenc't
In unsuperfluous eeven proportion,
And she no whit encomber'd with her store,
And then the giver would be better thank't,
His praise due paid, for swinish gluttony
Ne're looks to Heav'n amidst his gorgeous feast,
But with besotted base ingratitude
Cramms, and blasphemes his feeder. Shall I go on?
Or have I said anough? To him that dares
Arm his profane tongue with contemptuous words
Against the Sun-clad power of Chastity,
Fain would I somthing say, yet to what end?
Thou hast nor Eare nor Soul to apprehend
The sublime notion, and high mystery
That must be utter'd to unfold the sage
And serious doctrine of Virginity,
And thou art worthy that thou shouldst not know
More happines then this thy present lot."

>>10037790
>if, to you, "natural" means something other than "part of nature", then the onus to spell out what you mean is on you.

but why

this isnt my first rodeo, i know relativists and liberals of your ilk operate

first step is to redefine perfectly acceptable definition of 'natural' because it is inconvenient to your cause, when the nauseating task of explaining to an ingrate such as yourself what is meant by nature(with full knowledge of the fact that you understand what is implied by it, you're just being a disingenuous faggot) is completed you demand an ethical evaluation, despite the fact that ethics/'natural' are obviously intrinsically entwined in a debate of this kind. once the ethical/moral arguments are made the relativism commences,

>"so it has negative effect on society according to whom? what proof is there that homosexuals are unhealthy? oh those stats about homosexual deviancy and suicide? yeah thats because they're oppressed."

repeat ad infinitum.

its the same sort of logic scheme that is used by liberal morons to explain away all sorts of observable realities that do not correspond to their imagined and insidious worldview, and i have no interest in engaging in that redundant circular debate.

we both know there is no changing your mind, every hardline liberal self styled intellectual knows deep in their heart of hearts how wrong they are, they see it all around them, in the reality of the world lies the truth.

thats why such time is devoted to long-winded ad hoc explanations of stats and occurrences that would have otherwise been easily understood 60 years ago. its the emperors new clothes for the 21st century and its called liberalism.

so by all means, sit in your ivory towers sipping cum and buggering one another while you redefine the english language and terminology to fit your warped agenda, eventually it will come crashing down around you.

>>10037819

>it's not natural because the bible says so

wow so compelling. the bible also says to not wear two different kinds of cloth.

have you ever worn jeans and a shirt? you're an abomination

>>10037663
What the fuck are you talking about? Lmao

I'm not the anon who you were arguing with.
Please try to gather your words up and redirect to another direction.

There is no need to project.

>>10035021
They rally about black people.

Rallies are generally held for national politics, rarely international. I guess Vietnam is a good exception, but that's really extreme.

>>10037849
>redefine

hardly. and even if that were the case, at least i offer a clear definition.

all you've offered thus far is dodging. "that's not what i meant, you know what i meant. but i won't come out and say what i meant."

so your argument is that we shouldn't legalize gay marriage because gay people have a higher rate of suicide?

whatever it is that you want to say, just come out and flatly fucking say it you inconsistent word vomiter.

I'll make it really fucking simple for you.

Gayness is bad because x.

Fill in x with the harm.

>>10037851
The point is that the meaning of the word as the rest of us understand it is in the fucking Bible. It's in Shakespeare. It's in Milton. It's in Pope. It's in Dryden. It's not made up, it's not a secret. If you can't see that, you're a fucking idiot, or you're choosing not to.

GLOUCESTER
These late eclipses in the sun and moon portend
no good to us: though the wisdom of nature can
reason it thus and thus, yet nature finds itself
scourged by the sequent effects: love cools,
friendship falls off, brothers divide: in
cities, mutinies; in countries, discord; in
palaces, treason; and the bond cracked 'twixt son
and father. This villain of mine comes under the
prediction; there's son against father: the king
falls from bias of nature; there's father against
child. We have seen the best of our time:
machinations, hollowness, treachery, and all
ruinous disorders, follow us disquietly to our
graves. Find out this villain, Edmund; it shall
lose thee nothing; do it carefully. And the
noble and true-hearted Kent banished! his
offence, honesty! 'Tis strange

or how about this

KING LEAR
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'Tis not in thee
To grudge my pleasures, to cut off my train,
To bandy hasty words, to scant my sizes,
And in conclusion to oppose the bolt
Against my coming in: thou better know'st
The offices of nature, bond of childhood,
Effects of courtesy, dues of gratitude;
Thy half o' the kingdom hast thou not forgot,
Wherein I thee endow'd.

or

CORNWALL
Lest it see more, prevent it. Out, vile jelly!
Where is thy lustre now?

GLOUCESTER
All dark and comfortless. Where's my son Edmund?
Edmund, enkindle all the sparks of nature,
To quit this horrid act.

REGAN
Out, treacherous villain!
Thou call'st on him that hates thee: it was he
That made the overture of thy treasons to us;
Who is too good to pity thee.

GLOUCESTER
O my follies! then Edgar was abused.
Kind gods, forgive me that, and prosper him!

>>10037868
see >>10037860

>>10037224
>fedora intensifies

>>10037261
Underrated post

>>10037860
I'm not dodging, you fuck. I called you out for giving the wrong definition of nature. I am not the one who said gayness is bad, nor must I take up that argument in order to defend mine, which has been, from the first, that naturalness is a more complex idea than you're allowing.

>>10037421
>natural reaction

>Naturalistic fallacy
go to bed

>>10037880

in the manner in which it's commonly used, sure. i've acknowledged that. it's as complex as the preferences of the user--which is to say as infinitely complex as the changing tastes of all people who have ever used the word to defend their preferences.

this ackowledgement, however, is not devastating to my argument that a stricter reading of the word allows for better clarity in the debate. in this case, the debate of this thread is about gay marriage, homosexuality, etc.

>>10037871
see >>10037877

>>10034953
This thread started out pretty interesting

then it got derailed by a bunch of autistic fucks trying to ignore the naturalistic fallacy.

>logic is a conspiracy of the jews
get the fuck out

Social darwinism is a pseudoscience based on fallacies. You'd be an idiot not to know that by now.

>>10037889
>in this case, the debate of this thread is about gay marriage, homosexuality, etc.
And the opposition is quite clear: homosexuality is unnatural. It is not fair of you to call that mental gymnastics when you have not bothered to learn what "unnatural" means.

Your definition is, in a way, simpler. But that does not make it better. You cannot say "You can't use that word because my definition is different but simpler. Pick a different one that I can understand."

Or you cannot say that and pretend to any dignity.

And you did not begin by saying that more clarity was needed. You began by saying he was categorizing things as natural and unnatural arbitrarily. You were wrong to say this.

>>10037224
>gays are the only chance we have in stopping the Idiocracy from being fulfilled

You're an idiot.
That doesn't have anything to do with how they fucking raise a child. Accident or planned.

But, I see where you're coming from.

>>10037860
>Gayness is bad because x.
are you sure you're ready for that though? i mean you know why, every fag knows why gayness is bad, its why degeneracy and self loathing and self destructive behavior is so prevalent in the gay community, its the reason 'bug chasing' exists, its the reason gays piss in each others mouth's during gay pride parades, its the reason these two faggots here>>10037458 are doing what they're doing, or the reason this >>10037610 little adopted boy was taught to twerk by his gay parents. in everything gay is corruption and erosion of spiritual, ethical and moral good, its why at least 1/2 in gay men are victims of molestation in childhood.

homosexuals are more likely to be pedophiles, they're more likely to commit suicide, they're more likely to engage in promiscuity - many with 200+ sexual partners - they're more likely to have stds and abuse drugs and alcohol, they're more likely to commit rape and sexual assault.

a group of beings dedicated to putting their sex organ in an orifice from which we defecate, a subculture whose adopted children are more likely be neglected and molested. a hyper-sexual subculture that glorifies and revels in perversion and takes joy in undermining and subverting normality.

you're disingenuous to your very core because you know all this, all faggots know deep down why they're so reprehensible, thats why they loathe themselves. to be homosexual is to die and leave nothing but a history of fornication and filth as one's legacy, and that used to be OK before it became an institutionalized state sponsored phenomenon - faggots cant breed more faggots biologically, they know this, what they can do is create more faggots by increasing exposing children to faggotry, molesting them, sexualising them, turning them trans, none of this benefits anyone, it doesnt even benefit faggots, faggots will never feel content and at peace to be a faggot is to be an aberration.

>>10037903

>And the opposition is quite clear: homosexuality is unnatural.

that's not clear at all without a clear definition of natural.

what the opposition offers instead is a variety of text excerpts from shakespeare, the bible, and a few other poets where the usage of "natural" is used in a variety of ways--its definition still open to interpretation.

i invite the opposition to define "natural" clearly, as i already have multiple times.

natural:

this way we might gain some meaning from
>homosexuality is unnatural

why does this statement matter? what are the stakes of this stated unnaturalness?

the opposition has noted that homosexuality does not lead to sexual reproduction in humans. what are the stakes for this with regard to the topic of gay marriage?

if gay marriage were not legalized, gay people would still have gay sex which would not result in sexual reproduction.

furthermore, even if gay marriage were legalized worldwide, cis straight people would still have sex that leads to sexual reproduction at a rate much higher than the death rate--we would still be growing as a species as much as we currently are. all of the straight people would not suddenly go "welp, gay marriage is legal now, so that legal freedom has changed my sexual preference."

>>10037612
why do you have this webm saved pal?

>>10037962
same reason i have this saved

>>10037937
>little adopted boy was taught to twerk by his gay parents

citation needed. even cited, why is this inherently bad? child shakes body parts in street--thousands die. where's that headline?

>at least 1/2 in gay men are victims of molestation in childhoo

citation needed. even cited, this shows something wrong with the molester (gender unknown), and not the child who eventually becomes gay.

>homosexuals are more likely to be pedophiles

citation needed. this also implies equivalence between correlation and causation.

>more likely to commit suicide

citation needed on principle, although i personally will concede this statistic is true. correlation =/= causation.

>more likely to engage in promiscuity

citation needed. how is this inherently bad?

>more likely to have stds and abuse drugs and alcohol

citation needed. correlation/causation.

>more likely to commit rape and sexual assaul

citation needed. correlation/causation.
counter-statistic: 75% of all sexual assault offenders are white men, 75% of all victims white women. >http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/SOO.PDF

>a subculture whose adopted children are more likely be neglected and molested

citation needed.

>>10037969
furthermore, how does banning gay marriage address any of those issues?

>>10037969
>correlation/causation

>>10037953
It's not my place to argue any further. A very clear sense of what the other guy meant when he said "natural" is not for me to guess. It was enough that I have pointed out that you ought to be curious what he meant instead of assuming he meant something that, to me, it was clear he did not.

I have not been interested in pursuing any kind of hard and philosophical argument with you. Philosophy is not an interest of mine and never has been. But it hurts me to see two people hopelessly failing to grasp each other's meaning, and I have some affection for the word "natural". I cannot presently and, to my own purposes, need not find a very hard and definite outline of what natural means. For practical purposes, when people aren't being cunts, it's pretty easy to give and receive a good enough approximation of the word's sense and feeling.

Let it be remembered that making a thoroughly sound ethical point is no small ambition, and I won't pretend to undertake that here, nor have I heretofore. There are modes of conversation, not useless, which are not rigorous or exact. In logic, and in very fine argument, it is necessary to be sure of transferred meaning, to leave nothing to guessing. But in conversation, or in argument of a looser kind, it is no virtue to insist on always being given clarification instead of making an effort to build up a sense of what they mean. We are only stating opinions on 4chan, and they are quite comprehensible if you approach them with a generous mind instead of an unnecessarily severe one.

Abused "More Likely to Be Gay"
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/3949087/Abused-more-likely-to-be-gay

Alcohol and Drug Use Among Homosexual Men and Women
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2589133

Anal Cancer Rise in Gay Men Prompts Calls for Vaccinations
http://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/anal-cancer-rise-in-gay-men-prompts-calls-for-vaccinations

College Allows Transgender Man to Expose Himself to Young Girls
http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/college-allows-transgender-man-to-expose-himself-to-young-girls.html

CDC: 94 to 95 Percent of HIV Cases Among Young Men Linked to Gay Sex
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cdc-94-to-95-percent-of-hiv-cases-among-boys-and-young-men-linked-to-gay-se

CDC Warns Gay Men of 'Epidemic' HIV Rates
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/epidemic-1-2-of-gay-men-will-have-hiv-by-age-50-if-current-rates-continue-w

Comparative Data of Childhood and Adolescence Molestation in Heterosexual and Homosexual Persons
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11501300

Drug Use "Seven Times Higher" Among Gays
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/drug-use-seven-times-higher-among-gays-8165971.html

Estimates of New HIV Infections in the United States, 2007-2010
http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/2012/HIVIncidenceGraphics.html

Gay Couples' Children Oppose Same-Sex Marriage, Tell of Unpleasant Upbringings
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/8/gay-couples-children-oppose-same-sex-marriage-tell/

Higher Risk of Mental Health Problems for Homosexuals
http://psychcentral.com/lib/higher-risk-of-mental-health-problems-for-homosexuals/0006527

HIV Among Homosexual and Bisexual Men
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/

Grown Children of Gay Parents Tell Courts How Gay Marriage Destroyed Their Childhood
http://xtribune.com/2015/01/grown-children-gay-parents-tecourts-gay-marriage-destroyed-childhood/

Homosexuality in Ancient Greece - The Myth is Collapsing
http://libgen.org/book/index.php?md5=9fc4e0df9fe5de8d36287d737d8ace7c

Homosexual Men Have Fifty Times Higher Rate of AIDS
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic.htm#incidence

Homosexual Men Twice as Likely to Have Cancer
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/homosexual-men-twice-as-likely-to-have-cancer-study

Homosexuality: The Mental Illness That Went Away
http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2011/10/08/homosexuality-the-mental-illness-that-went-away/#.UQi3X12lxQI

How Different are the Adult Children of Parents who Have Same-Sex Relationships?
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X12000610

Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is 'Mental Disorder;' Sex Change 'Biologically Impossible'
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/johns-hopkins-psychiatrist-transgender-mental-disorder-sex-change

New Research on Same-Sex Households Reveals Kids Do Best With Mom and Dad
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/02/14417/

One in Five Homosexual, Bisexual Men in U.S. Cities Has HIV
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/09/23/us-aids-usa-idUSTRE68M3H220100923

No one cares 'your friend', can you fuck off and stop derailing the thread please?

>>10038021
Statistics on Sexual Promiscuity Among Homosexuals
http://carm.org/statistics-homosexual-promiscuity

STD Facts - Syphilis & MSM
http://www.cdc.gov/std/Syphilis/STDFact-MSM-Syphilis.htm

Syphilis Makes a Worrying Comeback in U.S.
http://www.nbcnews.com/health/sexual-health/syphilis-makes-worrying-comeback-u-s-n100606

Transgender is 'Mental Disorder;' Sex Change 'Biologically Impossible'
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/johns-hopkins-psychiatrist-transgender-mental-disorder-sex-change

Transgenderism is a Psychiatric Disorder: Its Sufferers Need Therapy, Not Surgery
http://yiannopoulos.net/2014/08/15/transgenderism-is-a-psychiatric-disorder-its-sufferers-need-therapy-not-surgery/

Viral Hepatitis Populations - Men Who Have Sex with Men
http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/Populations/msm.htm

WHO Warns HIV 'Exploding' Among Gay Men, Urges Preventive Drugs
http://www.afp.com/en/news/who-warns-hiv-exploding-among-gay-men-urges-preventive-drugs

>>10038026
>citation needed

ask and ye shall receive :)

faggot

>>10037981
your argument need not be as ugly as you are making it. don't resign yourself to the lamest name-calling just because you're frustrated with the difficulty of explaining your view to other people. it's hard as fuck to show people a point of view they don't already understand, and I get that, but being defeatist and resentful is only hurting the dignity of a view which I know you hold because you think it is in some way beautiful.

I know because I feel the same way, and I know what it is to feel angry when I see that view, and myself, spoken of as an archaism, a dinosaur, a joke. I know it's not a joke and so do you. But we are not ourselves when we let our frustration turn to hatred, and good intentions turn to blind fury. If we cannot keep up the feeling of love and beauty which animates our passions, then we shall leave a false impression—that all we ever did was hate faggots, and hate liberals, and hate everything, and ourselves. And then they will never have any reason to doubt that we were jokes.

Proper order, elevated sensibility, dignity, tradition, normal relations, all these things to me speak the beauty of an idea which has survived huge lengths of time and the brutality of bare existence. It is only from my love for the transcendent beauty of this naturally evolved scheme of ritual and affection that I find I revile abomination. One can only hate what is "degenerate" by first loving what is "regenerate". It is this that we fail, over and over, to communicate.

And of course we ought to hate the sin and love the sinner. My intention was never to hate people. I love humanity and want the best for it. Sometimes it is too easy to forget that the point, for all of us, to begin with, was to love each other and ourselves better than we do.

>>10038031
i admire your humility and stoicism, even your compassion is admirable, but its hard to embody all these things when you're arguing with people who are so willing to take joy in the destruction and denigration of everything good in the world.

"what can men do against such reckless hate?"

thats how i feel about these people, and not just gays but every dimension and person responsible for the downfall of western civilisation, it is an orwellian nightmare made real.

you're right that i could be more civil, but i think(as was the case with me) that destroying the media constructed image of homosexuals as suit and tie wearing nice guys who just want to live their lives in peace and harmony is one of the most effective means of making people understand why homosexuality is so destructive.

the hypersexual degeneracy is hidden and masked from view, repackaged into a marketable gimmick that does not exist, and if i have to be crude and foul in my description and hateful of those that defend it then so be it - the reality of it is crude and foul after all.

you're a polite and educated man and i admire that, and in spirit i agree with you, but the enemy is evil and conniving and taking the high road against them has shown to be ineffective, look at average neocon, so terrified and afraid of been seen as backwards or narowminded they're bending over to accommodate the views of people that hate them anyway.

i have to pretend to love feminism and faggot marriage or else i'd lose my job/career aspirations

faggot fucking pussy liberals indoctrinate weak willed motherfuckers through media

>>10036988
This is gold lol

>>10037540
no shut up you bigoted fascist asshole if you aren't overjoyed about the fact that Dick and Harry can solidify their butt contract in a court of law everywhere you're a piece of shit

>>10038060
where did jesus touch you?

>>10037470
There are several other animal species besides humans known to have homosexual animals.

It is natural because sexuality isn't something you can fucking choose. No one invented liking the same sex, that has always existed, only now in modern times it's more recognized.

>>10034953
literally fedora tier in terms of /fa/ness

Motherfucking faggots should seriously DIE. I hope the day will come where faggots will be killed. I dream about someone making a shooting at a gay pride. One day it will open. :-)

>>10035124

I'm straight and pretty accepting and I've noticed that almost all gay people I come across are bitter towards straights or severely close minded in some other way, usually it has to do with feminism or socialism or something.

I really like your comparison to the free love movement.

in my experience, gays tend toward the middle of the pack in terms of style. There are very few gay turboplebs (people who sincerely wear fedoras or shit like that), and very few who have genuinely superior taste.

>>10038713
>it happens in nature so it's ok and we should encourage it!
this is the worst justification
brb cannibalizing my children

>>10039143
I think that point was already covered thoroughly in the conversation -- something happening in nature is not a good argument for or against humans consciously repeating it because such a wide variety of acts take place in nature.

>>10037992

I don't think it's unnecessarily severe to call for people to be clear about what they mean when they say something.

>all these people on a online fashion hating on the faggy-ness of gay people
>on an online fashion board
Anyway the push towards "lgbt" rights is a joke because everyone knows it's only for gay people. Now that gays can marry in the US no one will care anymore because the gays got what they came for, despite the fact that trans rights/protections are worse than they were in the 60's and will continue to decline as the support for 3rd wave feminism rises.

Also you people are dumb as fuck, thinking that pride is for gay people is like thinking that st. paddy's day is for irish people; 3/4's of the people who attend are girls who are bisexual for attention and rest are the straight men chasing them. At least that's the pride celebration in my city.

>2015
>people still using the "le science, we are here to procreate, gays can't procreate, we must procreate and evolve, EVOLUTION!!!" argument
>being this disconnected from reality and scientific/statistic knowledge
It's like you don't want to be taken seriously lmao

>>10039269
Yo why do you say the rise of 3rd wave feminism will make trans rights decline?

As a gay man, I love fucking other men in the ass. This is what I do.

>>10034953
How the fuck could it be, when most of these people are naked? Absolutely disgusting.
(also)
>>10034965
/thread

>>10039282
Mostly because feminists have resources, an overwhelmingly positive public opinion towards them, and the ability to say or do anything without being called out on it because no one wants to go against feminism and be publically labeled misogynists- i.e., Lena Dunham admitted to sexually assaulting her younger cousin in a book she wrote and got zero legal or social backlash from it.

Third wave feminism's relationship with trans people can be split into two categories:
The feminists pretending to support trans rights are only doing that because everyone knows women in 1st world countries are treated equally as men so they need something to pretend like their movement is still relevant without actually having to promote feminism in countries where it is needed. The second is feminists who don't try to pretend that they don't hate trans people, the "terf's," who are insane in their own right but people will still listen to them for fear of being labeled politically incorrect despite the fact that they hate all men, and the women that don't buy into the shit they're selling.

In between those two shit-shows you have trans people trying to get insurance companies to cover transition related medical expenses, which all major insurance companies used to in the 60's with the backing from healthcare professionals before feminists (Cath Brennan and her ilk) threw a fit about fake women coming to spy and stealth rape them in the bathrooms. So yeah this is why trans people are salty as hell. Based on the past and the present, with the recent surge of interest in feminism there is literally no good outcome in it for trans people.

They were /fa/ when they looked like this.

>This is the current hot thread of /fa/

Great job guys
We're giving into social issues and acting like we give a fuck about sexuality now

not. Check out the news, all they show is queers with short shorts and generic gay t-shirts trolling for cock.

I-I love gay people. In fact, I'm having someone come over to poz my neghole tonight while my family watches. His name is Tyrone, I bet he's ethnic! Or at least Irish. Irish count as ethnic right?

Do I get to keep my job? I did good?

anyone been approached by gays and hit on?

Seriously odd experience. Happened more than twice. Talk about triggered. They go all out, not being polite about their intentions. Jumping to the point: partying and fucking you. And not even with a serious look of sincerity of their attraction, but openly fruity and carefree (try that approach with a woman).

for that reason and these >>10038009
>>10038021
>>10038027

if you fuck a guy, make sure hes straight.

>>10040142
>Seriously odd experience. Happened more than twice. Talk about triggered. They go all out, not being polite about their intentions. Jumping to the point: partying and fucking you. And not even with a serious look of sincerity of their attraction, but openly fruity and carefree

I've had the same thing happen.

>(try that approach with a woman).

Yeah, I think a lot of guys actually do that.

>>10039645
Thanks m8, good read. Any books/articles that elaborate on the subject?

>mfw homphobes are on a fucking fashion message board

>>10040528
>Homophobes
>Faggots

Tbh the homophobes have a better point.

>>10040528
why shouldn't there be?

>Not going to a gay pride parade dressed like a neo-Nazi

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhzMisyaeT0

>>10037969
Good goy.

>>10040528
every single person on 4chan right now suffers from self-hatred

>>10034953
Where's pigfuck when we need him the most.

I'm not even going to try to deny it. I think gay people, trans people, the whole group of fucking wierdos are disgusting. They are revolting and should die.

>>10041289
I disagree, but I respect your opinion.

>>10041111

Holy shit...

>>10034972
>>10034982
>>10034990
>>10035210
>>10039537
>while TPP is sneaking by
wow seriosuly this is more immediately tippable than anything racist/homophobic, which most of the time is actually deece banter, but i guess you guys are all 16 yo so fair. but someone ought to make the the tip post. gg for ignorance shortsightness / having your opinion captured by those poor poor politically protected interest groups thatd be fucked by fair trade, on both sides

>>10041453
Hold on so having an opinion is ignorant? Isn't that a little ignorant?

>>10039143
But anti gays always use "b-but it's not natooral! We need to reproduce!" as an argument because it's the best one they have. This counteracts that argument.

>>10041462
>having an opinion is ignorant? Isn't that a little ignorant?
of course not, dont be ridiculous i didnt say that anywhere. i just disagree with that particular opinon. i mean im glad you have one rather than being indifferent, i just disagree :)

>>10034965
>fair trade is evil
alright mate cool pic related
forgot to tip this post 1st time about

>>10034972
>>10034982
>>10034990
>>10035210
>>10039537
you guys pic related too tbh

>people having pride in identifying as a sub-category of human being

>no one celebrating over humanity taking a step closer towards accepting human beings as being human beings

i applaud for the inability to recognize the bigger picture

as well as the displacement of all that "pride"

>>10041502
>>10041453
>LE FEDORA MEME JOKE XDDDD

NICE ONE ANON!111 HAHAHAHAHA

>>10041542
then again 'TPP quietly sneaking by' followed by everybody saying '/thread' is hardly an argument for why free(er) trade between the two msot advanced economies in the world is a bad thing, either :)

>>10041576
Hint: it's not really about free trade.

>>10041473
no it doesnt you fucking moron because the animals that engage in homosexual sex are not exclusively homosexual, they still mate naturally and produce offspring.

lets take this thread

>>10041765
What is it about?

>>10041788
so do some gays tbf martin, what's ur beef with them?

>>10041822
Homosexuals account for a disproportionate number of hepatitis cases: 70-80% in San Francisco, 29% in Denver, 66% in New York City, 56% in Toronto, 42% in Montreal, and 26% in Melbourne (8).

Homosexuals are responsible for the “first sexually transmitted outbreak of typhoid fever” in the history of the United States. This disease is caused by ingesting human feces. (32)

More than 10% of homosexuals in major US urban areas are infected with HIV. To this day, they still make up more than 50% of reported AIDS cases in the United States. (30,31)

Homosexuals fellate almost 100% of their sexual contacts and ingest semen from about half of those. Semen contains virtually every germ carried in the blood stream, so this is about equivalent to ingesting raw human blood. (6)

Sperm readily penetrates the anal wall (which is only one cell thick) and gains direct access to the bloodstream. This causes massive immunological damage to the body’s T- and B-cell defensive systems. (14)

50% of male syphilis is carried by homosexuals as a rectal infection and can enter through the urethra of another homosexual during anal sex. (7) Around 67-80% of homosexuals lick and/or insert their tongues into the anuses of their partners (called “rimming”, anilingus, fecal sex, etc.) and ingest biologically significant amounts of feces (7), which is the chief cause of hepatitis and parasitic infections among homosexuals. (8) This practice is called the “prime taste treat in sex” in the bestseller The Joy of Gay Sex.

17% of homosexuals eat and/or rub the feces of their partners on themselves. (4)

12% of homosexuals give/receive enemas as part of sexual pleasure. (4)

10% of homosexuals admit to eating feces and/or drinking contaminated enema water. (8)

>>10041914
Homosexuals account for 3-4% of all gonorrhea cases, 60% of all syphilis cases, and 17% of all hospital admissions (other than for STDs) in the United States (5). They make up less than 1% of the population.

Homosexuals live unhealthy lifestyles, and have historically accounted for the bulk of syphilis, gonorrhea, Hepatitis B, the “gay bowel syndrome" (which attacks the intestinal tract), tuberculosis and cytomegalovirus (27).

25-33% of homosexuals and lesbians are alcoholics (11).

78% of homosexuals are affected by STDs (20).

Homosexuals were responsible for spreading AIDS in the United States, and then raised up violent groups like Act Up and Ground Zero to complain about it. Even today, homosexuals account for well over 50% of the AIDS cases in the United States, which is quite a large number considering that they account for less than 1% of the population.

References

(4) Cameron et. al. ISIS National Random Sexuality Survey. Nebraska Med. Journal, 1985, 70, pp. 292-299.

(5) "Changes in Sexual Behavior and Incidence of Gonorrhea." Lancet, April 25, 1987.

(6) Corey, L. and Holmes, K. "Sexual Transmission of Hepatitis A in Homosexual Men." New England J. Med., 1980, pp. 435-38.

(7) Family Research Institute, Lincoln, NE.

(8) Fields, Dr. E. "Is Homosexual Activity Normal?" Marietta, GA.

(11) Kus, R. "Alcoholics Anonymous and Gay America." Medical Journal of Homosexuality, 1987, 14(2), p. 254.

(14) Manlight, G. et. al. "Chronic Immune Stimulation By Sperm Alloantigens." J. American lied. Assn., 1984, 251(2), pp. 237-438.

(20) Rueda, E. The Homosexual Network. Old Greenwich, Conn., The Devin Adair Company, 1982, p. 53.

(27) United States Congressional Record, June 29, 1989.

(30) Reuters, Feb. 5, 2001(32) Associated Press, April 25, 2001

>>10035124
Open your mind, free love is a good thing, the repressive status quo is not. I'm not even gay.

>>10041920
>liberal teenage cuck retard telling a reasonable gay man how to think

>>10041914
>>10041916
sounds pretty nasty but I guess if it's just those fags giving each other diseases well fair play to them you know sounds cool to me

>>10041929
please stop talking to me

>>10041923
>paying a near on compliment to a fag
you've changed, piggy
you've changed

>>10041932
Alright boss decent banter as always
Fellate me some time

>>10041923
Just because Social Justice Warriors and Feminists turned you off to libralism, doesn't mean that conservationism isn't complete trash. Sexual repression is among the worst things that's ever happened to humanity, likewise even on the left you see feminists shaming male sexuality, it's all trash from the same dumpster.

>>10041957


>likewise even on the left you see feminists shaming male sexuality

>feminists and liberals attacking and demonising healthy male masculunity traits and behaviors is the equivalent of people disliking faggots rimming in each other in public


>Sexual repression is among the worst things that's ever happened to humanity

>Sexual repression is among the worst things that's ever happened to humanity

where do you morons learn shit like this, who tells you these things, do you come up with them ad hoc or is it an aphorism now being pushed on tumblr

>>10041969
oi please address this point >>10041947
cheers

>>10041969
I know you think you're so cool and edgy by being a contrarian reactionary, but conservatism is anything but cool and edgy.