Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!
A penis was meant by nature to be put into a vagina. Being gay is the opposite of this, so there is a necessary distinction whether or not it is ethically 'equal'.
Other than propagation though, which is hardly the motivation for the average person, i suppose your right. It's all kind of the same feeling really.
Quote: Anonymous said: whether its male or female, theres no reason for labels like straight or gay, if your attracted then fuck, thats it right?
How does that logically follow? I'm fine with the idea of fucking who you're attracted to, but why does that mean there is no reason for the labels? The labels were never there to help a person decide who they want to fuck.
The labels are there so that people can focus their energies where they are most likely to be successful. If I'm straight, a gay man has zero chance of getting my sweet ass, so he shouldn't have to waste his time trying. There should be a label so that I can let him know that he doesn't stand a chance and that it isn't personal.
I dont get the whole "not natual" gay thing. Being gay is natural for one reason. It happens. So to say being gay isnt natural is to say that human-beings are not natural.
I am straight but homosexuality is not un-natural.
I have never had a gay experience and if it came down to it, I dont think I ever really could. Penis in and around me doesnt sound fun at all
Quote: G-Cotty said: A penis was meant by nature to be put into a vagina. Being gay is the opposite of this, so there is a necessary distinction whether or not it is ethically 'equal'.
Other than propagation though, which is hardly the motivation for the average person, i suppose your right. It's all kind of the same feeling really.
What kind of theory is that? Are you saying that "nature" has some sort of consciousness with which to form an intent? How can something be "meant" for a purpose by nature? I understand that some people believe that there is some supreme being that intentionally designed things to be a certain way, but nature isn't a being.
I'll say this much...before I even knew what a vagina was, I was putting my penis in all sorts of things...no one told me to do it...I just did it...that's the closest thing to "nature" that I can imagine.
Quote: G-Cotty said: A penis was meant by nature to be put into a vagina. Being gay is the opposite of this, so there is a necessary distinction whether or not it is ethically 'equal'.
Other than propagation though, which is hardly the motivation for the average person, i suppose your right. It's all kind of the same feeling really.
you should do some research on bonobos. even in "nature" or non-homosapien civilizations, males having sex with males, and females having sex with females is observed
I'm able to fuck who I'm attracted to just about as often as I please. Thankfully I am a lucky one (no pun) who still finds their significant other(female) sexy after 7 years.
But yeah, if you're attracted to a dude, fuck him, assuming he'll fuck you, too
Quote: frylock91 said: You can fuck who you're attracted to, but if you're a guy fucking a guy or girl fucking a girl, you're gay.
This. What are you trying to say OP?
he was saying that you're being ridiculous. you can be gay but then you can go a screw a women. so then you are not gay? oh wait, no you're bi, right? oh but wait, isn't that when you prefer BOTH sexes? waht if you decide that you don't like being "gay" anymore and then you screw chicks... so then you're straight again... right?
you're all going to tell me it only works one way, and that once you you do one you "add to your label". right?
Quote: demius said: you should do some research on bonobos. even in "nature" or non-homosapien civilizations, males having sex with males, and females having sex with females is observed
he won't, nor does he understand what you're implying.
Quote: frylock91 said: You can fuck who you're attracted to, but if you're a guy fucking a guy or girl fucking a girl, you're gay.
This. What are you trying to say OP?
he was saying that you're being ridiculous. you can be gay but then you can go a screw a women. so then you are not gay? oh wait, no you're bi, right? oh but wait, isn't that when you prefer BOTH sexes? waht if you decide that you don't like being "gay" anymore and then you screw chicks... so then you're straight again... right?
you're all going to tell me it only works one way, and that once you you do one you "add to your label". right?
No, but most people do not change their sexual preference very often over the course of their lives, therefore it's quite an appropriate label in most cases.
I am straight. I have never been attracted to a man. Of course I have considered it, and taken a minute to think about what it would be like, and it just turned me right off.
If you switch back and forth in your preference, then you're bi. You prefer one sex sometimes, and the other another, but you probably aren't going from be disgusted with men to wanting a dick in the ass - it's a slight shift.
And then some people are gay, and the thought of heterosexual relations turns them off. I really don't see anything wrong with these labels. Obviously sexuality is more complex than that, there are transexuals, etc, etc, but straight, gay, and bi describes at least 99% of people.
so obviously it's more complex, but it's ok to slump people up in with a majority, because it's easier and "you know" that there are less people with other labels other then the "big ones"?
meh, i think that's bullshit. we should consider ALL of the labels if it's so complex, right? so then lets get our facts straight then...
if am switching in between liking men and women... how does that make me bi? being Bi means you like BOTH gender types, sexually. not "Choosing" between the two.
btw, i'm not saying that anything is inherently wrong with the Labels. just how other people label others, beyond their own discretion, because one might think things only work "one way"; that being the way one knows it. but it's simply not true.
I see what you're saying, but I'm a very practical person, and it makes sense to me sometimes to use these labels if I'm trying to convey something in a conversation.
No, it's not 100% perfect, but I'm not going to stop using them. There's a point where you just have to talk and accept slight inaccuracies rather than getting into philosophical debates about everything.
oh, but i'm not talking about labels. i'm talking about attitude. not saying you have "that" kind of attitude, though. i attribute "that" attitude (from experience) to people that use these excuses alot, (such as what practicality said labels serve) to make up for their ignorance on how sexual desire works.
Quote: G-Cotty said: A penis was meant by nature to be put into a vagina. Being gay is the opposite of this, so there is a necessary distinction whether or not it is ethically 'equal'.
Other than propagation though, which is hardly the motivation for the average person, i suppose your right. It's all kind of the same feeling really.
What kind of theory is that? Are you saying that "nature" has some sort of consciousness with which to form an intent? How can something be "meant" for a purpose by nature? I understand that some people believe that there is some supreme being that intentionally designed things to be a certain way, but nature isn't a being.
Are you fucking kidding me??? It is as simple as natural selection. By saying something is intended by nature does not mean nature is some sort of 'being'. But there is this little thing called natural selection that a lot of people believe in, and it seems to provide evidence that self propagation is a NATURAL trait in animals. I understand human beings are different for fuck's sake, but no one in their right mind can suggest that homosexuality is, by nature, anything but an abnormality.
Don't get me wrong, I can understand the principle of 'fuck it if it looks good', but any case of homosexual animal behavior is a minority case.
God damn, I am not trying to step on any one's politically correct toes or anything, but BEING GAY IS NOT NORMAL. Period. I have no problem with gays, we are all people at the end of the day. You people act like I'm ignorant for suggesting something so entirely obvious.
Quote: demius said: you should do some research on bonobos. even in "nature" or non-homosapien civilizations, males having sex with males, and females having sex with females is observed
he won't, nor does he understand what you're implying.
Wow. Pretentious much?
Again, I never said that it (homosexual behaviors) doesn't occur in nature, I just said that nature's INTENT is for sexual intercourse to occur between a penis and vagina. Even the bonobos must fuck like every other mammal if they want to reproduce.
Maybe for pleasure, it is a different story. That one is much harder to argue though and I wasn't really concerned with it when I rapidly responded in my initial post.
Images only 
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Edit 
Reply 
PSN: Upperlevel804
Anonymous
