'dark side' of homosexual culture

[finkian]

[Quote/]

The reason they molest boys has nothing to do with homosexuality, it is due to being a paedophile. Being a paedophile and being a homosexual are entirely seperate thing. The first is a fetish, the second an orientation. By and large most sexual abuse, directed against children or otherwise, is a power issue, not one of sexual gratification.

The sources like the ones you cite are blatantly anti-gay and are playing statistical and word games to manipulate you into believing gays molest children. This is a vicious lie, one refuted vociferously by the AMA, the APA and all reputable, unbiased medical and psychological organizations. It is a red herring used by religious zealots to further justify persecution of gays and maintaining bigoted, exclusionary laws and policies. [/QUOTE]

[finkian]

bravo to that.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
It is interesting that there is a hetero-homo double standard, namely that antigay people think it's perfectly fine to judge every homosexual by the acts of a few, whether those acts even relate to homosexuality or not. But the reverse logic doesn't seem to apply, as the overwhelming majority of horrible deeds on this earth have been committed by heterosexuals. It's just a matter of numerical superiority.

I believe it is another, subtle way in which antigay people try to debase and dehumanize homosexuals. When you lump them into groups and make mass-generalizations that "they" are all "this" and do "that," it makes it easier to see gays as a monolithic "evil" rather than as what gays are--individual human beings who are just as prone to virtue and vice as anyone else.

There is no "gay culture," but there are gays in every culture.

thanks

This garbage also reminds me of one other historical ideology that existed in the early 1900's.

During the lynch era, many whites felt that all blacks were inclined towards criminal behavior, and believed that the only difference between blacks, are the ones who are caught for their crimes, and blacks who have not been caught.

Thus, they justified using lynching as a means to "control" blacks, by attributing criminal behavior to an entire minority group of people.

[Case]

Originally posted by MacTBone
Actually Case, the nuclear family is at least as old as the medieval ages.
Back then people waited until they were in their late 20s to marry, primarily because the way they got a start inf life (land, tools, house, etc.) was by getting them from dead parents. So, basically everyone waited for their parents to die (if you were a peasant). It would depend on how many siblings you had and which set of parents died first in a relationship on where you ended up living. I'm taking (well, finishing) a course on the medieval ages, and this is all according to Prof. Zook.

Well my Sociology professer says that the nuclear family (ie a married couple + kids living seperatly from other relatives) has only become common in relativly recent times. Given that the professer is rather conservative, I don't see any major reason to doubt him on this.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by MacTBone
Nahhh, both women and men married later than teens. Women were generally a couple years younger, but they weren't in their teens.

It was actually quite similar to now.

All I know, is that the household did not consist of parents, grandparents, etc. It was just kids and their parents. So, that would not blow my theory out of the water. Most likely, if someone got pregnant the parents threw them out.

Makes sense to me, they didn't have much to live on - why would you want another mouth to feed?

I thought that in most under-developed societies, families tend to be large because so many babies die soon after they are born.

[blackice]

Guynemer you must have suffered a childhood trauma it certainly shows today...back up your claim that male rape is reported on an equal basis to that of female rape...good luck. Your above Spam shows your over all contribution to society...you remind me of a disease...

Tingkai it also states male rape is reported less and therefore the true numbers are not known...As our super poster Guynemer who thinks he is the voice of god misses. If the report as it suggested that in fact a small portion of male abuse is reported. How then can we conclude anything but opinion on the matter?

Monk first I ever heard the term, I found this article extremely controversial at best. The thing that stands out is the report statistics. These statistical comments are repeated in many reports. I can not help but wonder how any conclusive facts can come from something so incomplete, let alone a fact formed opinion.

Boris Godunov I agree the vast majority of reported cases what about the non-reported cases? Will this reality hold up if the effort was put into males reporting rape? I do not know at this stage no one does. I merely point out why there is little if no effort to find out...

pedophile and being a homosexual

unless of course as the author is trying to point out that the offenders are pedophile homosexuals? Or is their no such thing? For the record I am not anti-gay.

MrFun email the author please I would like to see if any response they have.

Tiamat proven wrong about what I merely posted an article I found controversial. I clearly ask for proof or confirmation of their post none forth coming I bet. It would appear one can claim but not prove their reasoning? Troll? Seems you have proven you have nothing to say at all and jump to huge conclusions based on mass hysteria?

If you did not like that article you will certainly hate this one here are some tid bits:

-33% of homosexuals ADMIT to minor/adult sex
-Homosexuals commit more than 33% of all reported child molestation’s in the United States, which, assuming homosexuals make up 2% of the population, means that 1 in 20 homosexuals is a child molester, while 1 in 490 heterosexuals is a child molester.

http://www.inoohr.org/homosexualstatistics.htm

No one has even bothered to comment on the lack of effort to find the true extent of male childhood abuse. How many posters here were abused as a child and did not report it? My guess is the numbers are higher than we think especially amoung boys...

[poison_flower]

Do you expect us to take the statistics in your last reply as fact?

Please...

I'm sure that everyone will notice that the "home" link at the bottom of the "statistics" leads directly to an ultra-conservative, hate-mongering website, meant to be nothing more than bigoted propaganda.

Facts? Give me something reputable!

[Jon Miller]

poison flower is back!!

Jon Miller

[blackice]

REFERENCES

I guess you missed that part? The whole section before the home bit. I guess this anti gay site did some research before posting this you?

Just posting some information you have something to offer do so. I would like to read it honestly as I said I am not anti gay I am anti child abuse though, by anyone.

These two line "I don't think so therefore I am right" comments are boring and show a lack of tallent let alone intellegence...

They are anti gay therefore I dismiss their research can be reversed to they are gay I will dismiss their research. That leaves us with what are the facts post some...

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Originally posted by blackice

If you did not like that article you will certainly hate this one here are some tid bits:

-33% of homosexuals ADMIT to minor/adult sex
-Homosexuals commit more than 33% of all reported child molestation’s in the United States, which, assuming homosexuals make up 2% of the population, means that 1 in 20 homosexuals is a child molester, while 1 in 490 heterosexuals is a child molester.

I for one would like to see exactly where they got these statistics. 33% admit and commit? Doubtful.

If that fact is, though I doubt it, true, then I need a ratio. 1:20::1:490 isn't the correct ratio

I'd also like to see the heterosexual minor/adult sex percentage.

[poison_flower]

References don't always mean that an article is filled with substance.

The source material from which each fact is taken is important. Particularly, in order to examine the context in which the fact was given. Taking facts out of context provides an unbalanced portrait of the truth.

Do you honestly believe that the people running the site on which you found your "statistics" would provide a statistic that portrayed homosexuals in a favorable light?

"Statistics" such as those are not reliable.

[Guynemer]

I'm sorry... could you quote me where I claimed that male rape is as equally reported as female rape? And, while you're at it, stop talking out of your ass? Much appreciated.

[MrFun]

Blackice, it does not matter what the statistics say. No matter how high or low of a number of homosexuals have a tendency towards pedophilia, you will find it is prevalent among heterosexuals as well.

Besides, 50% of prison population in United States are blacks. Does this mean that we should declare blacks a race of criminals?

That is what you seem to believe with homosexuals -- that they are a group of criminals.

You can never rightly apply criminal behavior to an entire minority group.

[Boris Godunov]

Cite the source of the statistic. Who performed the survey, what were his methods, who funded it, what kind of sample did he use, etc.

And if he performed the same survey on a similarly chosen group of heterosexual men in relation to underage girls, would it yield the same result?

[monolith94]

Am I the only one who is going to point out that it is wrong for both heterosexuals and homosexuals to commit pedophelia, no matter in what numbers???

The numbers are irrelevant, the ultimate purpose is the same: we have to make our society into one that treats kids like kids - not sex toys.