My Opinion On Homosexuals

[harri]

I think there are several types of homosexuality. Well, at least more than one. What strikes me odd in particular is the stereotypical fey gay type and the amount of narcissism they sometimes display. I think that type of behaviour is very closely related to narcissitic personality disorder, than to plain sexual desire towards same sex. I think a good deal of gays are not really 'normal homos', but just f'd up in general.

[Drooperdoo]

Metrosexual,
Don't attach any moralistic spin to it: It's Nature, biology. The highest law is the perpetuation of the species. That's pure Darwin. Not one iota religious.
Any creature that fails to pass on its genes has--from every objective standard--failed.
There's no need to try and attack that by affixing some bogus moralism on it.
There is none.
Nature is cruel and its blind processes are peremptory. To add some fake ethical gloss is silly.

[asdf]

Anything that contradicts that provokes a response that is probably hardwired into us--and that response is disgust. We stay away from those who offend our sensibilities, our prime-directive.

I don't know that our prime-directive is to breed. This is the goal by default of course of life, but the mechanism was not ingrained - at least not directly. The pleasure/force of sex was for millions of years all our lines ever needed. For mammals, motherly love was introduced. For humans and a lot of mammals, yet another love, monogamy, was introduced. What was just one cell shedding DNA became a family unit - with a father for the first time. That is that which was ingrained, but for the past half a century or less, birth control has entirely changed our breeding habits. Our primarily selfish desires are now being shown for what they are. We all probably fantasize about the idea of children at one point or another, but apparently sex that doesn't cost money (ie, taking care of progeny) is enough for most people that the birth rates are what they are.

I can mainly agree with what you were saying otherwise, but I think this makes homosexuals no different than most of us, aside from what I can see is a basic want for monogamy among heterosexuals. Women yearn for children (men not so much before they're born), but not more than what they see as an afluent lifestyle apparently.

Our (European/Anglophone) society's gone down the selfish hole either way - homosexuals indicate this - but it's with heterosexuals that it matters.

[Drooperdoo]

Homosexuals are a luxury; heterosexuals are a necessity.

Society can get along quite well without the former, but without the latter the species would frankly cease to exist.

So all this equating homosexuals with heterosexuals is comparing apples and oranges.

I'm not against them--or anyone, for that fact. More power to them.

My point was just--from a strictly Darwinian point of view--they're a dead-end. A cul-de-sac.

I take a Nietzschean view on the matter, though. In Thus Spoke Zarathustra, he inveighed against the "Haters of Life". Those sad, soul-sucking people who secretly enjoy the misery of others: He singled out the clergy, the moralists. It's sad that some homosexuals have joined their ranks. You can hear them mutter contemptuously of heterosexuals, calling them "breeders". Well, what's "breeding," but bringing forth life. If you're against that, then you, too, are one of the Haters of Life.
It's always depressed me for so many homosexuals, homosexuality is just a symptom to a larger spiritual malaise. A gay friend I had took me to a bookstore in his neighborhood, and I was shocked at all the pictures of self-mutilation that homosexuals used to stir sexual feelings in each other: body-piercings, holes gouged out of their genitals, ripped-open rectums and surgically-altered anuses.
There's a definite suicidal element in much of gay culture.
I wasn't very surprised when I read that homosexuals were having AIDS parties where they were intentionally infecting each other. To many, to be diseased was to be exalted, a martyr for a cause.
It was "sexy".
I'm not saying that all homosexuals are like this; but enough are so that everyone on this board knows exactly what I'm talking about: The dark abyss of the soul that overtakes people who've been seduced by the philosophy of the Haters of Life.

I don't hold any special contempt for homosexuals. I, like Nietzsche, feel the same stab of repulsion when I see a withered old nun, a moralizing half-man, or a mannish feminist who feels uncomfortable in her own body. All those neuters provoke a mixture of pity and contempt.

Yes, contempt. Because the most bitter people are drawn from among their ranks: the hate-filled hag, who delights in keeping childrens' frisbees; the disappointed celibate, who smile gleefully when one of the "breeders" undergoes a crisis.

These ineffectual people are typically the most malevolent and destructive.

The most relaxed people are the ones who are the most-fulfilled: Those with loving spouses and happy families.

For that--and that alone--is the species in existence.

[asdf]

I was just pointing out heterosexuals don't have this intrinstic want (over sex and money anyway) to have kids particularly...

And if not producing children makes a person 'bad', then human nature, as it seems to be showing through at the only time in all of history people have actually had a choice between having kids and not, is not to have kids, but rather to live in, if not hedonism, self-pleasures, sex, money, ... Kids are less important than a good career, etc...

Homosexuality seems to be a constant in most mammalian populations on the other hand. Sheep, penguins (hey, that one's not even mammal), monkeys, it hardly matters. A hormonal imbalance for the most part, and not some genetic deformity. Heterosexuals lived in populations without civilazation too, so I don't see how now they're supposed to be a dead end now of all times.

My point was just--from a strictly Darwinian point of view--they're a dead-end. A cul-de-sac.

So why not end their lives in a spree of hedonism and self-preoccupation? It's all they really have. (So I say: Lay off--leave them to their joyous, rollicking descent into oblivion.)

Again, that sounds like almost all heterosexuals in the first-world. (Not you, you have kids. Kudos.)

[tonynatuzzi]

Yeah I know many Heterosexuals mostly among Anglo Saxons though who are over 40 and are still not parents yet or don't plan to ever become one so are there people evil huh Drooperdoo.

[asdf]

Are you kidding me? He meant from the natural selection point of view.

Where the heck are you getting immoral/evil from? For the reason that it didn't mean that I put it in quotation marks.

By the way, "Anglo-Saxons" - do you know ancient tribals or Englishmen?--because last time I checked this country doesn't get a lot of English immigration.

[tonynatuzzi]

Anglo Saxon you know what I mean the average Irish/German/English mixed American.I use Anglo/WASP to describe any American Caucasoid who is neither Southern European,Hispanic,Jewish,or Middle Eastern.

[Drooperdoo]

Tony,
From a biological point of view, every person who has failed to breed has failed. There's no moral gloss to it.

If one takes that point-of-view, then homosexuality isn't any worse [or better] than nuns shut up in an abbey.

BOTH are lifestyles that preach the glories of biological celibacy, the sins of heterosexuality, etc.

So I'm not "anti" anything. I'm pro--pro-life, pro-family, pro-healthiness.

If I'm against anything, I'm against the bitter Haters of Life. And that circle is far larger than just homosexuals or religious fanatics.

P.S.--Think about it, though: Refusal to breed, to bring forth progeny is having a devastating effect on the West. With declining birth-rates, their societies are in upheaval as they have to import more and more Third Worlders to fill up the gap. There are very real sociological ramifications to a life of endless hedonism--a spree of self-absorption and sensualism as they rollick colorfully toward oblivion.

[asdf]

tonynatuzzi said:

Anglo Saxon you know what I mean the average Irish/German/English mixed American.I use Anglo/WASP to describe any American Caucasoid who is neither Southern European,Hispanic,Jewish,or Middle Eastern.

Okay, well, meet the dictionary definition--

An·glo-Sax·on (ăng'glō-săk'sən)
n.

1. A member of one of the Germanic peoples, the Angles, the Saxons, and the Jutes, who settled in Britain in the fifth and sixth centuries.
2. Any of the descendants of the Anglo-Saxons, who were dominant in England until the Norman Conquest of 1066.
3. See Old English (sense 1).
4. A person of English ancestry.

[Mike the Jedi]

I do find it annoying when people used Anglo-Saxon as if it were a synonym for Northern European. It's a very specific term.

[tonynatuzzi]

In terms of Anglo applying to all Northern Euros thats more common in states with large NonWhite populations especially here in California to most Mexicans the Irish and Germans are all Anglos to them since most of them can't tell them apart from the English and Scotch Irish all they know is that most these gringos look all look Anglo to them with their lighter hair,lighter eyes,and pinker skin than over 95% of Mexicans.

[tonynatuzzi]

So in conclusion in the SouthWest states of California,Texas,New Mexico,and Arizona if your of Northern European descent American especially a very fair haired and very fair eyed one most Mexicans and Mexican Americans will you see you as an Anglo even if 0% of your Northern European ancestry comes from Great Britain.

[tonynatuzzi]

Hey Drooperdoo there was that White mother in the South awhile back who gave birth to her 17th baby.

[murphee]

Drooperdoo, speaking of hedonism, these kind of people scare me.

Canada's group sex club patrons swinging free

By Robert Melnbardis
December 26, 2005

MONTREAL (Reuters) - On a recent night out on the town, Michel and Chantal Delbecchi left their suburban Montreal home and drove to the L'Orage Club in the city's east end, where they had sex with a couple they had never met before.

The Delbecchis, husband and wife since 1978, are "echangistes," French for "swingers," who for the past 21 years have been visiting clubs like L'Orage (Thunderstorm) to have consensual sex in a group with one or more other people.

For future outings, they will no longer have to fear police will raid the club and arrest them for being in a "bawdy house," a place where prostitution or acts of public indecency take place.

In a landmark decision on Dec, 21, the Supreme Court of Canada lifted a ban on swingers' clubs, ruling that group sex among consenting adults is neither prostitution nor a threat to society.

The ruling sparked outrage, largely in English-speaking parts of Canada, where critics said it would erode limits on indecency or obscenity, encourage prostitution and even contribute to the corruption of minors.

In the mainly French-speaking and predominantly Catholic province of Quebec, however, the decision caused barely a ripple of adverse reaction. Newspaper editorialists fumed in Toronto, but largely yawned in Montreal.

Swingers across Canada cheered the ruling, especially those in Quebec, where adherents go to clubs not only to meet others like them, but also to have sex on the premises.

"It might make it easier for others interested in swinging to take the next step and visit a club," said Michel, 48, huddled next to Chantal, 43, on a sofa at the dimly lit L'Orage.

Michel, who works at an outlet of warehouse retailer Costco, and Chantal, on leave from her job at a school bus operator, said most swingers are not comfortable in the public spotlight.

"We have a few friends who were afraid to come out to a club because they were worried about how a raid might affect their work or family situation," said Chantal.

For L'Orage club owner Jean-Paul Labaye, the court ruling is vindication after a seven-year court battle that began with a 1998 police raid in which he and 40 of his patrons were arrested for being in a bawdy house.

"Everyone was shocked that we would be treated like bandits," said Labaye. "I vowed to defend myself and their cause if that was their desire and that is what I did."

GANG BANG TUESDAYS

Labaye, a portly and jovial 46-year-old native of France, said swingers celebrated the Supreme Court victory with a late-night party at L'Orage.

In an interview the next day at the club, temporarily housed at a venue which features "gang bang" Tuesday afternoons, Labaye apologized for not being able to show a reporter and photographer the upstairs rooms where groups have sex because the housekeeping service had not yet cleaned them.

The club is housed in an elegant but aging two-story house on a busy street. The ground floor has mismatched sofas and chairs, scant lighting and framed photographs on the walls depicting scenes of mild sexual bondage.

The club has no license to sell alcoholic beverages, but sports a small bar that offers coffee and caffeine-loaded soft drinks.

Labaye hopes a group of Florida investors will help him move into swankier digs, which in addition to the requisite private rooms will have something resembling a refined cigar lounge.

Club rules will be the same -- no illicit drugs or alcohol abuse, and when it comes to propositions for sex, a reply of no means no.

In the meantime, the swinger soirees will continue at L'Orage and at least two dozen similar clubs in Quebec, including one in Gatineau, just opposite the Ottawa River from the imposing stone hulk of the Supreme Court building.

Labaye and the Delbecchis, who have three adult sons, are preparing for important changes in their personal lives.

Labaye plans to marry his girlfriend in Paris in May.

As for Michel and Chantal, a 25-year-old woman has become their mutual lover and all three plan to move in together early next year. Despite that new relationship, the Delbecchis expect to continue exchanging sex partners in Quebec clubs.

Said Michel: "At the club, we have sex with people. At home, we make love."