Heterosexuality is unnatural

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by Buddha1, Jun 11, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Oh! Wonderful. A second person making sense, and on the same page as Beyond Time and Space. [No insult intended Leopold, but like me, you have essentially given up on influencing Bhudda1s blinkered view.]
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Satyr Banned Banned


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    I take offence. I rarely try to make sense.

    I am not trying to influence Buddha1, at all. He’s a lost cause.
    Just trying to make him see how much of an imbecile he is. But like all morons, they can never know how much of a moron they are, cause then they would cease being one.

    I’m not here to change the world. I’m here to enjoy it.
    Stupidity is the funnest thing of all.
    Why ruin it?
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Why should we listen to the little girlie with hairy arms......?

    Satyr: "......ooohh, Hooowww I wish I did not have a dick......!"
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Ophiolite, you're really so hollow and vain. You pretend to speak from the high pedestal of 'scientific' backing. You have continually shown your disgregard for scientific approaches, evidences.

    And now you cheer a queer buffoon, who is saying nothing in particular, only because you can not find a logical opposition to me.

    That's pathetic!

    It seems to you anyone who opposes me, by whatever means, scientific or not makes sense!
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2006
  8. Huwy Secular Humanist Registered Senior Member

    Buddha you rave on and on about society oppressing males into models of masculinity and heterosexuality - and then expose your related issues, and blatant phobia, by calling people "homo" and "little girlie" etc.

    Are you seriously a men's counsellor?
    The gay guys you talk to, do you call them "little girlie" and "homo" or "fag"???
  9. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    a.) I'm not here in a counsellor position.

    b.) My 'insulting' remarks are reserved for people who seek to refute my statements by being abusive or insulting. I have never been the first person to call names. The basic purpose to hit back is to 'devolve' the fake power on the basis of which they make those remarks.

    c.) I've never called anyone 'homo'. I've called them 'queer', which in my definition is negatively feminine, a lesser male. And to the people I say that to, I'm not too off the mark!
  10. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Correction.....Into models of 'false' masculinlity.

    I wish to restore the rights of masculine gendered males. And to restore the value of true, natural masculinity, which the heterosexual society has forced out of its domains.
  11. Huwy Secular Humanist Registered Senior Member

    I don't care if your not "here" in a counsellor position, the fact is you say you talk to a lot of men, and yet you lash out at people on the internet calling them all manner of insults which supposedly contradict your sensitivities.

    So you call people queer, yet you argue that most men have homosexual desires and tendencies?
    You argue that "false" models of masculinity are wrongly imposed upon men in a society, and then call men which you perceive as feminine "queers" or "girlies"??

    Do you realise how absurd and ironic that is?
    Your fighting for the rights of men to be naturally homosexual, and non-masculine (which i have nothing against - i'm not very masculine myself)
    and then you call them queers and girlies?

    Thats weird man. Its like from time to time you become the bully you so claim to hate.
  12. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    I guess, its because I know the world of straight men inside out, and how it operates --- that I can figure out how the traditional heterosexual powerbase is thrown at me to dislodge me and to scare other men off what I'm saying.

    It's becasue of what I know about the straight world, that I respond in kind, as a well thought out strategy --- to show exactly how fake the power wielded by these 'vested interest group' is.

    If I don't do it, I would be bullied out of the forum!
    Queer represents 'negative femininity' (and not masculine male desire for men) and its not wrong to call those who make wrong use of social power that they are not naturally entitled to.

    And I've never claimed that most men have homosexual desires! I don't even recognise 'homosexuality' as a valid term.

    If you make a list of people I have called those things --- it were those who abused me (or continue to do so!), in order to 'dethrone' me. What I do is what works in the straight world! and it works! I still see nothing wrong with me --- though if you really show me a good reason why I shouldn't do it (from my point of view), and can show me a better way of handling such abuses, I'll take your advice!

    I object. You're misquoting me again. I oppose homosexuality!
    The non-masculine males who like men are quite powerful within the 'homosexual' space. But, yes, I am speaking for the right of men to be positively feminine.

    I only call queers to those who are 'negatively feminine' and who are falsely keeping 'social masculinlity' which the society has given to them by robbing naturally masculine men of it!
    I think you misunderstand me!

    I'm forwarding the cause of natural masculinity which is NOT about bullying.

    But in order to survive, fighting all alone in this forum, I need to fight back at those who want to lodge me off from the straight world --- and thus restricting my fight to the 'gay' arena. You are probably not aware of the dynamics under which I am fighting!

    But I do appreciate all of what you've said as being sincere. And I welcome any such positive criticism of me --- which in days to come will make me do some insight!
  13. Xerxes asdfghjkl Valued Senior Member

    If you're so convinced, why not put these ideas in a book with.. you know.. table of contents, index, glossary...

    Your ideas are hard enough to navigate as is. I don't think it matters that JamesR merged the thread because few have bothered to read it.
  14. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Strange, then how so many responded! and so many agreed!
  15. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member


    I was going through the merged thread "Heterosexuality is unnatural" and I was shocked to find that it had been merged so haphazardly, that several important posts are just missing.

    I was really taken by surprise a couple of months ago when all of a sudden, one day I found my threads merged into one big mess of a heap. Of course it involved months and months of hard work --- a discussion that I had taken to a certain level --- against all odds.

    I wanted to leave sciforums at that time. But I got back and then got sucked in, starting all over again. Sciforums has its plus points I guess.

    But I wanted to make this explain a couple of things to everyone.

    a.) My various threads may have looked all the same to some people --- maybe most, and they did treat it the same, posting the same stuff (often rubbish) in each of those threads --- but they were clearly different threads, talking about different aspects of male oppression --- that they all involved heterosexuality doesn't mean they were talking about the same thing!

    and I had made them into different threads as a strategy, because, people I knew how people tend to take the discussion round and round in circles deliberately to scuttle the truth. I had strategically broken down the issue into its essential components and made it a point to discuss them separately, so that it would be difficult for them to deny the individual component.

    b.) I understand, the threads were taking up a lot of space in the 'human science' forum, but couldn't you or someone have spoken with me about this problem so that together we could have found a solution. If the threads needed to be merged I could have helped to do it in a way that would have caused my discussions the least amount of damage.

    c.) I had also spent hours daily making summaries of each thread, listing links to evidences etc. at the beginning and linking posts to other posts in order to guide readers. All that too came to nothing.
  16. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    There is no point in complaining now......and this is not why I am raking up the issue again. I am talking it openly here and not through a pm, because a group of people wanted to sabotage the threads, while another were quite negatively affected by its abrupt ending --- so I want to make a couple of suggestions before everyone, so that it does not cause the same misunderstanding again.

    I am suggesting the following steps to reclaim some of my work, and to restart the discusssions:

    1. Can you James, break the current thread "Heterosexuality is unnatural" into two parts:

    (i). "There is no evidence for heterosexuality in nature" (from page 1 to 9), and

    (ii). "Heterosexuality is unnatural" (from page 9 to 53)

    and then lock both the threads and put them into the archives. I don't want any further discussions on these threads. The first one is in any case completed and proven.

    Can you further put the thread "There is no evidence for heterosexuality in nature" in the Archives section of "Biology and Genetics".

    2.) I want to restart the following thread again in the human science forum:

    "95% of men have a sexual interest in other men."

    3.) At the same time you can now lock the thread "Gender orientation is Biological", because the discussion in it is over too.
  17. devils_reject Registered Senior Member

    Listen there is no such thing as natural or artificial, eveything is natural. If you choose men, women or donkey that's your problem. But coming here to spread personal ideologies and base it on some kind of reason or scientific deduction is unaccepted. "Sexual attraction" is what you like, doens't have to be towards humans alone. I like computers, chemicals, cars, food, and art...or do you have problems with these choices as well?
  18. Hercules Rockefeller Beatings will continue until morale improves. Moderator

    Hey, I found a picture of Buddha1 and his response to any rational scientific analysis of his nonsense....

    <img src="http://www.geocities.com/emmacrew/philip/images/nohear.jpg" width="241" height="239">
  19. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    It doesn't count when you reply in agreement to your own post.
  20. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    James: could you move the entire thread to pseudoscience?

  21. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member


    It is merged in time order of the posts. No posts are lost when threads are merged.

    Then perhaps you ought to have thought about how to present it in a coherent manner in the first place, because it sure looked like all the five threads were essentially the same.

    Also, if you're really putting in this much effort, have you considered starting your own web site to tell the world?

    Threads on this forum are not "owned" by just one poster. All members are free to post in them, and no single poster has control over them, in terms of keeping them open, closing them etc.
    Then don't post to them.

    Re-start? What do you mean?

    The posters decide when the discussion is over.
  22. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    James, you're missing the point of my post.

    You obviously don't want me to clog the forum with my threads. And I'm offering a solution to that --- so that I can have my threads while at the same time honouring your concerns.

    There has to be a middle way.

    And I'm suggesting that as a possible way out. That you keep closing my threads when they are over and done with. Anyone who wants a further discussion on the issue can start another thread again. It is no use to keep them open when there is no real discussion going on and someone only uses it to post abuses or stuff.

    Because, afterall the basic goal of the forum is to facilitate genuine discussion.

    Because I wouldn't want threads that I consider different to be merged into one again......there is no use starting them in the first place.
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2006
  23. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Heterosexuality is our duty to mother nature.

    Everything in nature is a display of freedom loving heterosexuality. It is hard to look outside your window and NOT see an act of heterosexuality. A bee pollinating a flower. A pigeon humping another pigeon. A bug bugging another bug. A humpback whale whaling another whale. And all enjoy the act of heterosexuality. Well, not always enjoy, but they all sure feel the drive. Sometimes the drive is so strong a cow hops on top of another cow. But luckily no calves are born from that.

    You go swimming in the sea and you notice that you are basically swimming in diluted sperm and eggs and the heterosexual products of their merger. You can actually submerge yourself fully in the heterosexual product of nature. 100% nature. It feels good.

    Nature loves heterosexuals. It gives them a second chance.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page