Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 General Skepticism
 The secrets of men: unbalanced homophobia
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 8

H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard

USA
4574 Posts

Posted - 03/04/2008 :  13:54:53   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send H. Humbert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Bill scott

What is not to be turned off by two men, for the lack of a better term, fudge packing each other?
That's the best term you could come up with? Really?

Sure you'll have a % that get into man/women anal sex, but I believe that % to be low among the hetro's.
Thank chastity pledges and abstinence-only education for making it quite popular among young Christians, bill. You're still a virgin if you abstain from vaginal intercourse, or so the reasoning goes.


"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman

"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie
Edited by - H. Humbert on 03/04/2008 13:55:56
Go to Top of Page

Bill scott
SFN Addict

USA
2103 Posts

Posted - 03/04/2008 :  14:10:27   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Bill scott a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by H. Humbert



That's the best term you could come up with? Really?


Define your meaning of "best" for me please.

Sure you'll have a % that get into man/women anal sex, but I believe that % to be low among the hetro's.


Thank chastity pledges and abstinence-only education for making it quite popular among young Christians, bill. You're still a virgin if you abstain from vaginal intercourse, or so the reasoning goes.


What buffoons made such an idiotic statement? Any moron who engages in anal sex in effort to maintain their "virginity" is even a bigger buffoon. And you got any citations on that anal sex being popular amound young Christians?

"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-

"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-

The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-

Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9687 Posts

Posted - 03/04/2008 :  15:15:03   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I've never been into porn, so I can honestly say that any few seconds I've seen the last 15 years are by mistake.

However, that doesn't mean I don't appreciate movies like Bound.

I prefer watching two women feeling each other up, rather than male-and-female action.
I could fantasize changing place with one of the women in the first example. But in the latter example, the male will always be a competitor for the woman, and he's already there on site.


Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page

Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist

USA
4955 Posts

Posted - 03/04/2008 :  15:38:02   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Cuneiformist a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Bill scott
Sure you'll have a % that get into man/women anal sex, but I believe that % to be low among the hetro's.
I'd say that the numbers are higher than you believe.
Go to Top of Page

H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard

USA
4574 Posts

Posted - 03/04/2008 :  16:43:07   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send H. Humbert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Bill scott
Define your meaning of "best" for me please.
Why? You're the one who said that you lacked a better term, thus stating that was the best you could come up with. If you don't think it's the "best" term, then that would mean you do have a "better" term in mind. Which is it, Bill?

What buffoons made such an idiotic statement? Any moron who engages in anal sex in effort to maintain their "virginity" is even a bigger buffoon. And you got any citations on that anal sex being popular amound young Christians?
Many Teens Who Take 'Virginity Pledges' Substitute Other High-Risk Behavior for Intercourse, Study Says
Although teenagers who take "virginity pledges" begin engaging in vaginal intercourse later than teens who have not committed to remain abstinent until marriage, they also are more likely to engage in oral or anal sex than nonpledging virgin teens and less likely to use condoms once they become sexually active, according to a study published in the April issue of the Journal of Adolescent Health.

Christians keen on keeping their children ignorant about sex end up having children who have ignorant, unsafe sex. I would say this should be obvious, but it's amazing the number of Christians who oppose sex education in schools.


"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman

"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie
Edited by - H. Humbert on 03/04/2008 16:44:12
Go to Top of Page

marfknox
SFN Die Hard

USA
3739 Posts

Posted - 03/04/2008 :  18:27:16   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit marfknox's Homepage  Send marfknox an AOL message Send marfknox a Private Message  Reply with Quote
What is not to be turned off by two men, for the lack of a better term, fudge packing each other?
Er... if you like sweaty man-parts and watching the sexual dynamics between two passionate lovers in action, lots!

It just ain't natural.
You obviously don't know much about homosexuality in both human history and the animal kingdom. But we've been through this before, and I don't expect you to pay attention or respond this time either, so I simply suggest you try educating yourself about reality. It's fun talking about things you actually have learned about instead of just making things up from your ignorant gut.

On the other hand you can take George Clooney and Brad Pitt and show them as butt buddies and most women will be totally turned off by this. I think it's the anal penetration that grosses most out.
Not so much Brad Pitt 'cause I'm not into him, but Clooney's hot. I'm rather into the more regular-looking "bear" types, so put Clooney together with, say, my thirty-something automechanic with a good beard, and I've got a great show for the night. Guess that makes me perverted, unnatural, abnormal, and/or a liar in your tiny world, Bill.

Do you just dismiss a substantial minority of women like myself? I think many if not most women are turned off by hard pornography, and I think that you'd find that women who enjoy hard pornography are typically not turned off by the image of two men having sex. But as neither of us have produced anything to back our arguments up except our own biases, I digress.

Is it hot in here?

"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong

Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com

Go to Top of Page

Bill scott
SFN Addict

USA
2103 Posts

Posted - 03/04/2008 :  18:47:08   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Bill scott a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse



I prefer watching two women feeling each other up, rather than male-and-female action.


But wouldn't you prefer watching two very hot women over two repulsive women?

"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-

"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-

The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-

Go to Top of Page

Bill scott
SFN Addict

USA
2103 Posts

Posted - 03/04/2008 :  19:24:19   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Bill scott a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by H. Humbert




Why? You're the one who said that you lacked a better term, thus stating that was the best you could come up with. If you don't think it's the "best" term, then that would mean you do have a "better" term in mind. Which is it, Bill?


I just want to understand your definition of “best” first.


What buffoons made such an idiotic statement? Any moron who engages in anal sex in effort to maintain their "virginity" is even a bigger buffoon. And you got any citations on that anal sex being popular amound young Christians?


Many Teens Who Take 'Virginity Pledges' Substitute Other High-Risk Behavior for Intercourse, Study Says


I didn't see anything about Christians, just “virginity” pledges. Not that I would think that there would not be any who claim to be Christians within the numbers of those who take some pledge, but rather I just find it interesting that you choose to make the claim that:

making it quite popular among young Christians, bill. You're still a virgin if you abstain from vaginal intercourse, or so the reasoning goes.


singling out Christians and then implying that many of them hold the position that anal sex does not affect their virgin status. I ask you to give me some numbers on that claim and you cite a piece where I could not find the word “Christian” one time? In a new world of alleged tolerance you sir have demonstrated yourself to be nothing but an old fashioned ignorant bigot. Why I bother to respond to a bigot I do not know, so obviously indoctrinated in his ways.



Christians keen on keeping their children ignorant about sex end up having children who have ignorant, unsafe sex.


A. If they are then they are doing the children a great disservice. A Christian, or any parent for that matter, should want to talk with their kids about sex rather then leaving that up to Hollywood and the government.

B. And to single Christians out, again, and act as if teen sex and pregnancy is only a “Christian” problem is just more evidence of your blatant bigotry.


I would say this should be obvious, but it's amazing the number of Christians who oppose sex education in schools.


“In schools” is the key here. I believe it's the parent's responsibility to teach their children about sex and not the governments. The fact that many parents now don't does/should not shift the burden of responsibility onto the government.

"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-

"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-

The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-

Go to Top of Page

Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie

USA
4826 Posts

Posted - 03/04/2008 :  20:46:46   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Valiant Dancer's Homepage Send Valiant Dancer a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Well, since this conversation is swirling the bowl with Bill pointing to others an claiming bigotry but fails to see his own with other religions, might as well inject some levity.

coloquialisms for anal sex

fudge packing
pounding the poop chute
Goin all Deliverance on ya
Greek style
pillowbiter
butt pirate

any more? Might as well.

Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils

Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26020 Posts

Posted - 03/04/2008 :  20:48:33   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Bill scott

I just want to understand your definition of “best” first.
When it was your definition of "better" that you volunteered to put under a magnifying glass?
I didn't see anything about Christians...
The background is easy enough to find.

What's interesting is that Title V was signed by Clinton. I don't recall if, 12 years ago, there was a major outcry over this idiotic program, or if it got "snuck in" with a bunch of other amendments to Welfare Reform. But it's clear that Bush and Congress love the program.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

marfknox
SFN Die Hard

USA
3739 Posts

Posted - 03/04/2008 :  20:55:31   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit marfknox's Homepage  Send marfknox an AOL message Send marfknox a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Bill wrote:
Now the key word here is hot. Two ugly women, or fat women, or fat ugly women making out usually do nothing for most normal guys. When they are turned on it is mostly by the fact that the women are hot and not by the fact that they are kissing another women. Again, most guys will be turned on by hot women doing anything, rather then fat and/or ugly women kissing.
First, this is just a shitty, pompous thing to say. You used the word "normal" for men who are unable to be turned on by "fat and/or ugly"(we can only assume by conventional standards of beauty) women. This implies that men who are sexually attracted to overweight or conventionally unattractive women are abnormal, and not being normal is a pejorative. Basically you are insulting both fat/ugly women and the men who find them arousing (as certainly plenty do - just look at the alternative porn industry!)

But more importantly, Bill, your whole argument is that gay sex is unnatural 'cause (supposedly) most people think anal sex is gross. But if most people also think ugly people having sex is gross, it stands to your reasoning that ugly people having sex is unnatural.

Another answer is much better common sense: You are not turned on by fat women having sex because you personally don't find a generously full figure hot, and you are repulsed by men having sex because you personally are straight. Thankfully not everyone is like you. After all, variety is the spice of life.


"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong

Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com

Edited by - marfknox on 03/04/2008 20:56:24
Go to Top of Page

marfknox
SFN Die Hard

USA
3739 Posts

Posted - 03/04/2008 :  21:01:38   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit marfknox's Homepage  Send marfknox an AOL message Send marfknox a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Bill's elegant arguments on anal sex carried to their logical end:

French kissing is a sex act which produces zero offspring. Clearly the mouth, teeth, and tongue are best suited for eating. STDs and other diseases are commonly spread by this act since the mouth is an opening in the body, teeming with germs. Most men are repulsed by the image of two men passionately open-mouth kissing, and most women are repulsed by this and by the image of two women passionately kissing. Men think women kissing is hot, but only if they are hot women doing it. Therefore french kissing is unnatural.

Edited to add: Nevermind that both straight and gay people have been open-mouth kissing for all of recorded history and that some animals engage in the same act. It's still unnatural!!!

"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong

Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com

Edited by - marfknox on 03/04/2008 21:03:07
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26020 Posts

Posted - 03/04/2008 :  21:32:52   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Comeon, marf... It's Freedom kissing.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 03/04/2008 :  23:34:58   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Bill scott

What is not to be turned off by two men, for the lack of a better term, fudge packing each other? It just ain't natural. Obviously, this was never designed to fit into that. And most honest people acknowledge that fact.
...
Jesus, Bill! Just the mention of "unbalanced homophobia" assures your entrance, stage right, like Maynard G. Krebs in Doby Gillis ("You ring?"). You're a credit to slaveringly hateful, self-righteous bigots everywhere, Bill.


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Go to Top of Page

JohnOAS
SFN Regular

Australia
800 Posts

Posted - 03/05/2008 :  04:37:10   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit JohnOAS's Homepage Send JohnOAS a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Notch up another "C" for me, BPS.

Bill, your comments about "hot" vs "repulsive" are almost meaningless. Opinions like that are entirely subjective. Sure, you may be able to pick a few attributes which would get a majority approval/disapproval, but there are no absolutes as far as general taste is concerned.

To ask whether or not I'd prefer to watch two "hot" lesbians vs two "repulsive" lesbians is more than a little redundant, no? By definition, I've got to prefer the "hot" ones, as long as we're using my definition of hot. If it's your definition of hot or repulsive, then I truly can't say unless we agree on what qualifies one for membership of these groups.

Originally posted by Bill scott

Ramming any object, let alone another man's equipment, up the anal of another man, women, or child, I believe, is found disgusting by most. Sure you'll have a % that get into man/women anal sex, but I believe that % to be low among the hetro's

I'm sure I've seen you use this phrasing before. Is the word "anus" also disgusting to you? It's just a word, Bill. And what prompted you to bring the children into the discussion?

As to why group "C" guys don't enjoy gay male porn, but don't mind the girl-girl action, could it not be, at least in part, summarized by the following highly complex equation:

One naked woman enjoying herself = good
Two (or more) naked women enjoying themselves = even better

Naked guys just reduce the amount of naked female flesh on display at any given time.


John's just this guy, you know.
Edited by - JohnOAS on 03/05/2008 04:39:31
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 8 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.44 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000