Genital mutilation....

[jpl458]

I miss Robin.

 

[Jon]

Apparently, this transgendered convict who killed someone - currently in a woman's prison - now identifies as a baby. Is it not illegal to have a baby in prison? How can the justice system get away with it!

...demands nappies, baby food and a dummy in her prison cell

I'm a baby!

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Apparently, this transgendered convict who killed someone - currently in a woman's prison - now identifies as a baby. Is it not illegal to have a baby in prison? How can the justice system get away with it!



I'm a baby!

Demands a dummy in her prison cell? Hate to tell her this, but the dummy is already in the cell.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

now identifies as a baby

Would have been more sensible if s/he had identified as a prison guard!

 

[Jon]

Smart move Uncle!

 

[Isaac]

The "gay sex scene" is neither more nor less violent than the "hetero sex scene." It is the variants such as the "rough sex" crowd, BDSM, and the many kinds of drug-assisted groups that are dangerous. And THOSE crowds exist and ARE INDEED dangerous. But I have known many gays who were not at all into the seriously nasty stuff. They want a more tranquil relationship. You are therefore generalizing a bit over-broadly

I did not mean the gay sex scene is necessarily more violent. It is, however, far more promiscuous.
And just to repeat, I'm generalizing here. I also know gays who are in long committed marriages, and heterosexual people who are extremely promiscuous.

I just mean in general, the gay community tends to emphasize tryst-ing for the sole purpose of having sex with relative strangers, groups, etc., far more than the heterosexual scene. It's just the way it is, I'm not necessarily sure exactly why, although I have of course my opinions.

Surely you wouldn't deny this as a general observation? Not sure how anyone can 'not' see this, if you've lived in a variety of cities, communities, seen a variety of webpages and strolled through predominantly gay neighborhoods.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

I did not mean the gay sex scene is necessarily more violent. It is, however, far more promiscuous.

More promiscuous than, say, Hollywood? Isaac, I live in New Orleans, which IS a gay-friendly city. It is also a party city. Before I got married I visited a lot of places trying to hook up with someone. I have to say that I cannot confirm your opinion based on the people I know and the places I have seen. But then again, there is this little question that has to be asked. In order for you to have formed such an opinion, were you trying at the time to be your brother's keeper by intruding into private lives, or perhaps being voyeuristic? OR were you the victim of confirmation bias, in which you see what you expected to see BECAUSE you expected to see it, whereas someone else lacking that bias would not have even raised an eyebrow? And I'll ask another question... promiscuity occurs because of folks who don't want to form deeper relationships. Is there perhaps a form of societal pressure on gays that would make their relationships less stable because of external opinions? Nature vs. nurture, of course.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

" gender affirming care"

https://twitter.com/x/status/1660345540599586818

 

[Isaac]

More promiscuous than, say, Hollywood?

No. Remember, again, I said I was generalizing. If I am generalizing across the whole population, how could I have been referring to Hollywood? And frankly, I don't really know how Hollywood people behave in promiscuity compared to the average. I know they all seem to have 3+ spouses and 50% of their children end up self-identifying as a non-traditional sexuality, but that's another point you're helping me make for another day...

One thing for striving towards 100% intellectual honesty (we are all on the spectrum somewhere, but nobody perfect), is that even in topics where you have a certain 'loyalty' to, or are protective of in some contexts (for good reason perhaps), Yet...You still have to be willing to hear someone generalize across a population, considering only whether that generalization is actually Truthful, even if it is Negative.

For example. I personally am a firm believer in a loving, mature, emotionally-disciplined Parent providing physical discipline to their children.

Yet, if you wanted to assert that "to generalize across all parents who hit their children, there is more inappropriate violence than not", I would be receptive to that, although it stings, and although I hate to admit it. (but not really - I know full well that loving discipline is totally different, and yes, is perceived by a child totally different, than angry unpredictable or unwarranted violence.

@The_Doc_Man I'm going to tell you the same thing you've graciously told me at times. I respect the cogs that are your patient, iterative, historical and fact-based philosophical mental machine .... But I feel comfortable saying that if you and I were able to randomly sample 500 self-identified gay men, they themselves would agree with my interpretation and observation and at least state that they 'believe' (how would we definitely measure? but at least they have the same impression)......that taken on average, as a whole, the gay population is more promiscuous than the straight one.

The carefully planned, almost fastidiously designed networks existing for the sole purpose of total strangers getting together on short notice for nothing but 15 minutes of sex existing in the gay community long before there was Grindr and Tinder.

 

[Isaac]

But then again, there is this little question that has to be asked. In order for you to have formed such an opinion, were you trying at the time to be your brother's keeper by intruding into private lives, or perhaps being voyeuristic? OR were you the victim of confirmation bias, in which you see what you expected to see BECAUSE you expected to see it, whereas someone else lacking that bias would not have even raised an eyebrow?

Well, that's a somewhat iffy question to ask, but I'll believe the best that your intentions are not to take a cheap shot or embarass me by trying to force me to "tell your secrets or else you lose this argument", because you do have a little bit of a point in wondering how I got my opinion.

And I suppose I could ask you the same thing.

However, if your opinion in the argument is based exclusively on NON-sordid, then doesn't that bias your conclusion exactly as much as it biases mine, quite probably in the opposite direction?

But, in the interest of as much straightforward exchange as seems reasonable, let's just say that like most people, I've had my dalliances in life. And, perhaps unlike most people but like some, I've had particular difficulties that, while they were not sexual in nature, they definitely had me rubbing shoulders with a lot of wild places and people. I picked up a lot of information during that time based on where I went, what I read, who I had to see. It exposed me to a world of all kinds of vices and underground things. One thing became clear to me fast....the gay community's active networks of sex-only schemes outweigh anything straight people have created, or would probably feel comfortable with. I don't particularly blame them, I think there is a perfectly good explanation for it. Straights and gays probably want about the same contents of life, on the whole. However, straight people cannot engage in sex with major safety concerns - usually the female more concerned with exploitation, deception and assault than the male. However, gays can engage in this without that paradigm, as they are of the same gender and tend to start out from a slightly more equal footing. Thus, nature takes its course. They can take advantage of a paradigm for sex that others just can't do.

I suppose this is kind of like the age-old "massage parlor" dispute.

You had the guy who shot up one of those back-alley asian massage parlors in the news a year or two back, citing some kind of frustration with a sex addiction. You had CNN running articles bemoaning the awful Racism, Sexism, Asian-ism, and any other 'ism they could think of, to think that a white man DARE make such a conclusion about this parlor that he, by all accounts, hadn't been to himself. Trying to convince their readers that such a conclusion made no sense at all, and that, Rare were such parlors, by God! You had a lot of men probably reading that article mumbling...what in the world are they talking about? Clearly they've never participated, or they would know that probably 90% of them actually are sex workers. Of course these same readers can't exactly muse verbally their opinion at the dinner table, now can they?
I think you get the point.

 

[Isaac]

I suppose a shorter way to say this would have been: See how long it takes you to find me 50 straight girls who are willing to engage in situations where they head somewhere to meet a total stranger for 15 minutes for sex.

Now see about the opposite.

Or ask your gay friends/relatives that exact question, infer something from their response. Don't tell them anything about the context of the question or my beliefs .. just the question.

 

[jpl458]

There are four essential elements that an effective paragraph should consistently contain: unity, coherence, a topic sentence, and sufficient development. In order for a paragraph to maintain a sense of unity, the paragraph must focus solely on a single idea, point, or argument that is being discussed.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

@Isaac

Yet, if you wanted to assert that "to generalize across all parents who hit their children, there is more inappropriate violence than not", I would be receptive to that, although it stings, and although I hate to admit it.

"Spare the rod and spoil the child" is a familiar admonition. The problem there is that we don't come with a Parent's Manual either built-in or published somewhere. The Bible doesn't offer advice about how hard or how often to apply said anti-spoiling rod. Therefore, there is an inherently slippery slope regarding corporal punishment. How much will be ineffective? How much is enough? How much is too much? How do we tell from one child to another? I don't know but I pretty much guarantee that it's a moving target for which the best shot is no shot at all, and pick something other than a rod for discipline.

I feel comfortable saying that if you and I were able to randomly sample 500 self-identified gay men, they themselves would agree with my interpretation and observation and at least state that they 'believe' (how would we definitely measure? but at least they have the same impression)......that taken on average, as a whole, the gay population is more promiscuous than the straight one.

That has not been my observation, but I will also add that there is this little factor - that before the Obergefell vs. Hodges decision (Supreme Court of the US, 2015), gay marriage was not permitted and gays lived together facing all sorts of laws aimed against same-sex cohabitation with a non-blood-related person who wasn't also a tenant. Prior to Obergefell, gays couldn't even legally live together without the fear of prosecution and persecution. Which begs the question of whether your impression of promiscuity was a case of people taking that which was available to them at the time because the stability they wanted was denied them. I don't know, but it is a question that must be asked. And if you look, you see that the clubs where nubile young girls and virile young lechers congregate for straight interactions also seem quite numerous. You see promiscuity because you expect it. I won't say it doesn't happen, but your statements betray that expectation, and such expectations lead to confirmation bias.

However, straight people cannot engage in sex with major safety concerns - usually the female more concerned with exploitation, deception and assault than the male. However, gays can engage in this without that paradigm, as they are of the same gender and tend to start out from a slightly more equal footing.

I believe you are incorrect about this, and your negative attitude regarding women's intentions suggest you may have had a bad time of it as a younger man. I suspect your view is jaundiced by your prior interactions - for which I cannot chastise you too much if true, because in that case you came across those viewpoints through the school of hard knocks - the best and the worst teacher there is. However, my experience with women is different than yours. One of my jobs before I took on the Navy contracting job sat me in the same office with a gay guy who unfortunately DID sometimes come up against the guys who want rough sex. Your comment about "gays being on a more equal footing" is therefore somewhat inaccurate.

Straights and gays probably want about the same contents of life, on the whole.

Yes, absolutely true with every gay person I have ever met so far. But if you believe this, then your discussion regarding 500 self-identified gay men tends to fly in the face of this comment.

You had CNN running articles bemoaning the awful Racism, Sexism, Asian-ism, and any other 'ism they could think of, to think that a white man DARE make such a conclusion about this parlor that he, by all accounts, hadn't been to himself.

You ACTUALLY LISTEN to CNN? It is a known, "woke" rag of a news organization that thrives on sensationalist stories to get ratings.

 

[Isaac]

There are four essential elements that an effective paragraph should consistently contain: unity, coherence, a topic sentence, and sufficient development. In order for a paragraph to maintain a sense of unity, the paragraph must focus solely on a single idea, point, or argument that is being discussed.

Yet yours didn't

 

[Isaac]

your negative attitude regarding women's intentions

What in the world are you talking about? I was referring to the common safety considerations of an entire gender.

You must live on a different planet where ladies do not consider even their basic safety when meeting up with someone?? How in the world can you even dispute that point?

Doc you've gone so far into unbelievable and I know you don't even believe this yourself territory, it would have been a lot easier to just say I see your point Isaac..

 

[Isaac]

I sense that you've changed quite a bit over time from a previous point in history where you were able to concede some of the less disputable points from time to time. I would like to think there is some completely benign reason, and will continue to believe that there is until I no longer can.

It seems you have become more creative in trying to twist everything I say and I'm not really sure why. The way that you quote me versus the interpretation that you imply, they don't even make sense to me anymore, like I literally can't even understand what it is that you're implying I can just tell it's something totally unrelated to what I said.

Hope all is well. probably just a lot of misunderstanding, not terribly uncommon for two people who disagree.

 

[jpl458]

Yet yours didn't

Oh yes it did.

 

[Isaac]

Here's a hilarious article from MSNBC to change the mood and lighten everyone's spirits

NAACP’s Florida travel advisory highlights DeSantis’ statewide sabotage

Florida’s Republican governor is going scorched earth ahead of a widely expected presidential bid. And his state will pay the price.

www.msnbc.com

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Regarding my comment about your negative attitude regarding women's intentions:

What in the world are you talking about? I was referring to the common safety considerations of an entire gender.

You must live on a different planet where ladies do not consider even their basic safety when meeting up with someone?? How in the world can you even dispute that point?

Doc you've gone so far into unbelievable and I know you don't even believe this yourself territory, it would have been a lot easier to just say I see your point Isaac..

Do you remember posting this?

However, straight people cannot engage in sex with major safety concerns - usually the female more concerned with exploitation, deception and assault than the male.

The way you wrote that, it could be read that you suggest women to be exploitative, deceptive, and violent. If you meant that another way, say it another way. The argument can be made that women will try to exploit horny men who aren't thinking above the neck at the moment. It can also be argued that women will deceive a man to get what she wants. I don't disagree that it has happened in some cases. The incidence level, however, can be another story.

 

[Isaac]

Like this is the more extreme stuff, that I'd say there ought to even be legal repurcussions for. First a Republican president who makes sure notice is served to anyone who claims to be crazy enough to actually think it's OK, and later, criminal consequences for those who keep trying to sexually molest the thinking of children

Maryland county schools forcing kids into 'extreme' LGTBQ storybook lessons: lawsuit

A group of parents are suing a Maryland county school board for ending an "opt-out" for storybooks they say promote "extreme ideology" on gender identity and sexuality.

www.foxnews.com