Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


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!

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Original Sensible Seeds Feminized Cannabis Seeds   North Spore Bulk Substrate

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]
Offlinemikeownow
Humungus fungus

Registered: 09/01/05
Posts: 2,856
Loc: WA,USA
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: Temptress]
    #5256712 - 02/02/06 07:31 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Temptress said:
hi all this is my fisrt thread. i am 26 and just discovered women. iwas raised baptist and told this was wrong but is very exciting.




Go for it! Let your lesbian half come out.


--------------------
No statements made in any post or message by myself should be construed to mean that I am now, or have ever been, participating in or considering participation in any activities in violation of any local, state, or federal laws. All posts are works of fiction.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesoylent_green
The greatEnitsuj
Female

Registered: 12/11/02
Posts: 765
Loc: Ontario
Last seen: 17 years, 1 month
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: Temptress]
    #5257514 - 02/02/06 10:33 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Temptress said:
hi all this is my fisrt thread. i am 26 and just discovered women. iwas raised baptist and told this was wrong but is very exciting.





wow i cant believe everyone has made this into a joke. i always thought the shroomery was more supportive :frown:

anyways..
you should go with whatever is in your heart, weather its guys or girls. a god so magnificent ( i think ) would not judge you on something like who you fell in love with, that to me seems shallow.
good luck!


--------------------
What fun is it in Nirvana while other beings are suffering?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePed
Interested In Your Brain
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: mikeownow]
    #5258199 - 02/03/06 02:58 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

"Go for it!"

What bad advice.

On the subject of sexuality, our culture is divided between two extremes. On the one hand, there is the sexually repressive element. On the other, there is the extreme of sexual liberty. Both extremes are equally wrong and both are equally dangerous. Both arise from the same element of deep insecurity that exists as part of our imagined identity as a human race. From this lack of confidence arises the instinct to repress and excessively canonize our sexuality. Arising in dependence upon this is the reactionary extreme of sexual hyper-indulgence.


>> I am 26 and just discovered women. I was raised Baptist and told this was wrong but it's very exciting.

The worst possible advice to give to this limited background is "go for it". Not once is it considered 'perhaps the interest comes from the wish to explore a taboo, and not from a genuine orientation'. Not once is it asked 'has she ever been abused by men?'. Not once is it asked 'would this exploration cause her harm in any way?' No. It's taken as granted that any exploration into a sexual dimension is a positive exploration, as no human being is a self-aware human being unless they are fully in touch with their own sexuality. From this flows the assumption that the best way to be in touch with your sexuality is to simply indulge in whatever impulse happens to arise. This is an extreme and non-sensical view. It is born from the ludicrous "if it feels good, do it" paradigm, and it is as foolish a view as the one which feels we should be ashamed of any sexual inclinations that fall outside of a narrow standard.

It is very dangerous to explore one's sexual orientation on the experiential plain alone. Before entering the experiential plain it is absolutely necessary to explore the issue on the plain of one's own mental, emotional, and spiritual background. A strong, insightful alertness of one's own state of being is absolutely necessary. Neglecting this effort is just laziness or self-indulgence. I would even say "follow your heart" is bad advice, as one must know how to discriminate between tendencies of the wisdom-heart and tendencies of the ignorance-mind before they can follow such intuition properly.

Mere experiences with the opposite gender, or with any other aspect of human sexuality, are not avenues to self-knowledge, nor are they avenues to harmony with one's own sexuality. They are mere experiences. These experiences can't teach us anything about ourselves because they will be interpreted through the same lense lacking self-knowledge which sustained the initial the sense of hesitant curiosity. As an endeavour into self-knowledge, looking to mere experiences is completely redundant. We must look to our own self first, and this is done only in a highly individualized, personal context. Advising others to jump in head first is a very dangerous and uninformed suggestion.

In my life there are a surprising number of women of all ages who explored homosexuality at some point in their life. Each of them chose to explore their curiosities by having romantic and sexual relationships with women, as opposed to asking questions of themselves and developing an alert awareness of their own being. All of these affairs ended in disaster, and lead only to more confusion and more self-doubt. No answers were found, because answers are not to be found in mere experiences. Incidentally, 100% of these women later confided to me that they had been, without even knowing it, impelled into their homosexual lifestyle by negative and in some cases abusive experiences with men. It was the one factor that each of them had in common. This alone is reason enough to treat any hesitation about one's sexual identity with a strong reliance on skepticism, alertness, and genuine introspection, and not on the pursuit of mere experiences. Just because it feels good doesn't mean it's right for you or healthy for you.

Please be careful about this issue and avoid extreme thinking.


--------------------


:poison: Dark Triangles - New Psychedelic Techno Single - Listen on Soundcloud :poison:
Gyroscope full album available SoundCloud or MySpace

Edited by Ped (02/03/06 03:24 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePed
Interested In Your Brain
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: Deviate]
    #5258223 - 02/03/06 03:12 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

>> for instance in buddhism it is considered sexual misconduct

I'm not sure what school of Buddhism teaches this, but it certainly does not come from a lineage of Buddha. Sexual misconduct is defined as any sexual act that harms others, and which is carried out with a harmful intent, or out of ignorance. It is not any more exacting than this.


Sexual Misconduct:
From Buddha Atisha's Lamrim:

If we have taken vows of celibacy the object of sexual misconduct is any other person. If we are not celibate and have a partner, the object of sexual misconduct is anyone else. If we are not celibate and we do not have a partner, the object of sexual misconduct is any of the following: anyone else's partner; our own parent; a child; anyone with a vow of celibacy; pregnant women; animals; or anyone who does not consent.

We must correctly identify the object of sexual misconduct. For example, if we are not celibate and we do not have a partner, and we have sexual intercourse with someone believing that they do not have a partner when in fact they are married, our action is not complete. We must also be determined to commit sexual misconduct, and we must be influenced by delusion. Usually sexual misconduct is committed out of desirous attachment, but sometimes it is committed out of hatred, as when soldiers rape the wives and daughters of their enemies. Sometimes people commit sexual misconduct out of ignorance, not realizing that there is anything wrong with it or thinking that it is healthy or exalted, as when someone has sexual relationships with other people's partner's believing that free love is a path to liberation.


As you can see, there is nothing here about homosexuality. That is because there is nothing intrinsic about homosexual behavior that harms living beings.


--------------------


:poison: Dark Triangles - New Psychedelic Techno Single - Listen on Soundcloud :poison:
Gyroscope full album available SoundCloud or MySpace

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoppie
astral projectile
Male

Registered: 07/23/04
Posts: 2,653
Loc: cloud hidden
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: Ped]
    #5258226 - 02/03/06 03:16 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Lezbianism is indeed wrong.

Lesbianism is the correct spelling. :grin:

But seriously, what does it matter who sticks what where as long as all involved enjoy it?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePed
Interested In Your Brain
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: koppie]
    #5258231 - 02/03/06 03:18 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

>> what does it matter who sticks what where as long as all involved enjoy it?

Just because it feels good doesn't mean it's right for you or healthy for you. Enjoyment is not a valid criteria for determining the wisdom behind any sort of behavior.


--------------------


:poison: Dark Triangles - New Psychedelic Techno Single - Listen on Soundcloud :poison:
Gyroscope full album available SoundCloud or MySpace

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleFungusMan
I81U812
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/06/05
Posts: 3,112
Loc: Everywhere
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: Ped]
    #5258369 - 02/03/06 06:24 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

I dont know. Send me pics and Ill tell ya!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoppie
astral projectile
Male

Registered: 07/23/04
Posts: 2,653
Loc: cloud hidden
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: Ped]
    #5258386 - 02/03/06 06:37 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Freedom should include the freedom to injure your own health.
And 'right' ? Right by whose standards?
You seem to believe there is an absolute moral standard to apply.
I do not.

But then I am a firm believer in classical Epicurianism.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleIcelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Male

Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: Ped]
    #5258718 - 02/03/06 10:34 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Ped said:
>> what does it matter who sticks what where as long as all involved enjoy it?

Just because it feels good doesn't mean it's right for you or healthy for you. Enjoyment is not a valid criteria for determining the wisdom behind any sort of behavior.




I think true enjoyment is a valid criteria. And we also can learn valuable lessons from making poor choices. In fact that is why most people gain in maturity as they age. Live and learn.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePed
Interested In Your Brain
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: koppie]
    #5258925 - 02/03/06 11:42 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

>> Freedom should include the freedom to injure your own health

Sure it does. Of course it does. No contest on that point. However, does this mean that we should advise someone in ways that are likely to injure them before helping them? Does it mean that we should stand idly by while others give such unhelpful advice? Furthermore, is it imposing on other's freedoms to stand against such harmful advice? If two deaf people have their back to a vehicle that is plumetting toward them, is it imposing on their freedom to shove them out of it's way?

>> And 'right' ? Right by whose standards?

Somehow I knew that just using the word "right" would solicit this kind of knee-jerk anti-moralistic reaction.

The sentence read "right for you". That means according to the individual's standards. The only standard I am trying to suggest is a cautious one: one that uses legitimate criteria for gaining insight into complicated issues. I am opposing the pervasive assumption that says "if it feels good, it must be the right thing for me." This kind of thinking is only destructive, and seems to be what's behind the advice coming through here.

>> You seem to believe there is an absolute moral standard to apply.

That would be extreme thinking. The idea that sexual liberty means following your impulses is extreme and absolutist thinking. The idea that our impulses are to be an object of our shame, or that there is one canon of acceptable sexual behavior, is extreme and absolutist thinking. What I am holding up, admittedly with a bit of fervor, is near the middle. It is an approach that acknowledges and accepts with kindness one's own tendencies and inclinations, and, recognizing the risks involved in navigating them, explores them in an alert, honest, balanced, and therefore productive manner.



>> I think true enjoyment is a valid criteria. And we also can learn valuable lessons from making poor choices. In fact that is why most people gain in maturity as they age. Live and learn.

Well of course people learn valuable lessons from making poor choices. If there is no alertness, and no caution, however, we are not really able to learn much from the choices we make, and we are prone to emotional, mental, and spiritual injury of varying degrees of severity. We are like a blind horse who knows he should not walk over sharp stones, but is unable to see the ground where the stones lie. Advising this confused and uncertain young woman to "go for it" or "let the lesbian in you shine" is not different from sending a blind horse into a field of jagged stones. The horse may cross the field completely unharmed, or it may come by only slightly injured, or it may be injured so badly that it never completely recovers. Doesn't it seem foolish to guide someone this way?

All I am saying is that such advice is completely wrong and destructive. Such advice assumes liberty in the indulgence of an unfamiliar sexual dimension. There is no such liberty to be found with this attitude. It assumes that latent tendencies must be true tendencies. There is no basis for such an assumption. You'll forgive me if I'm insistant about the error in giving a confused and uncertain young woman advice that will almost certainly harm her before it helps.

I am not making any statements about the correctness of homosexuality, because there is nothing about homosexuality that is correct or incorrect from it's own side. The correctness of homosexuality is entirely dependent on the individual engaged in such an exploration. If such an individual is to make an informed and therefore healthy decision for themselves, and if they are to discover what their sexual nature truly is, they must approach the contemplation with an alert and cautious mind.

The only information we have about this woman's situation is that she grew up in a repressive environment, the severity of which we do not know. We know that she is twenty-six, and that feelings of attraction to women are only appearing now. From this extremely limited knowledge of her background, some here have deduced that homosexuality is her true sexual identity, that it was her Baptist upbringing blocking the proper development and expression of that identity, and that the way to be free is to "go for it!" There is not nearly enough information to make such gigantic assumptions. Should this woman, influenced by her confusion and hesitation, adopt the same unfounded assumptions, she will not make any strides toward discovering her sexual identity. There are countless contributing factors which arrived this young woman here asking this question. Given the limited knowledge we have of her background, the only beneficial advice is to give is advice that encourages a greater degree of alertness, caution, and introspection.

Edited by Ped (02/03/06 12:00 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineWildRunner
Obey little,Resist much

Registered: 02/13/05
Posts: 286
Loc: Where the wild things are
Last seen: 16 years, 9 months
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: Ped]
    #5258948 - 02/03/06 11:49 AM (18 years, 1 month ago)

I have nothing against gay people. Needed to clairify that point for my next statment/question.

How are they suppose to reproduce? ie. make babies and further ad to cycle of child birth, rearing, and the otherwise general scheme of things thats been in motion for hundreds of thousands of years?

This question has been on my mind for a while. And please, dont start slingin mud at me about being some hater, (or whatever the correct term is) im just looking for other people's views about this idea.


--------------------
If you dont know where you're going, any road will take you there.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePed
Interested In Your Brain
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: WildRunner]
    #5259041 - 02/03/06 12:15 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

>> How are they suppose to reproduce? ie. make babies and further ad to cycle of child birth, rearing, and the otherwise general scheme of things thats been in motion for hundreds of thousands of years?

This is a perfect and valid question. It does not come from hatred or prejudice. It does not come from any kind of harmful discrimination. It comes from observing the mere facts of an issue and the desire to know more. That is clear. The fact that you had to preamble your question with specific clarification that you are not hateful or prejudiced, and that you had to conclude your post asking that no one attack you for asking the questions you asked: all of this is very telling about our collective attitude toward this subject. It is obviously not an informed and balanced attitude, and it obviously lacks any amount of confidence. This implies that extreme thinking is prevalent.

You're right, homosexuality does fly in the face of what we understand about the natural world and it's sustaining evolutionary process. All of our biological traits have arisen from the process of natural selection, whereby those traits most conducive to the continuity of the species are those which are expressed in generation after generation. Since homosexuality is completely contrary to the continuity of the species, in that homosexual beings are not inclined to reproduce, this would suggest that there is no biological element tending an individual toward homosexuality, and that homosexuality must therefore have it's roots in some mental, emotional, or spiritual phenomenon.

Does this mean that homosexuals are sick? It could be taken that way, but there is no basis for such a conclusion. A sick person suffers. Since not all homosexuals suffer as a result of their sexual orientation, it follows that there is nothing intrinsic about homosexuality that is sickness. By the same token, however, if a person is suffering as a result of their sexual orientation, and many, many people are, it follows that there is a sickness present, and that such beings are in need of the help and support of their peers.

Does it mean that homosexuals are an inferior "breed"? It could be taken that way, but there is no basis for such a conclusion. All we can conclude from the available information is that homosexuality is not a biological orientation. Even this point is still debatable. All beings derrive their sexuality from a multitude of different contributing factors, only one of which is their biology. Is there any reason to suppose the inferiority of one who derrives their sexuality in different ways from the same basis? Of course there is not.

There is nothing wrong with asking these kind of questions.


--------------------


:poison: Dark Triangles - New Psychedelic Techno Single - Listen on Soundcloud :poison:
Gyroscope full album available SoundCloud or MySpace

Edited by Ped (02/03/06 12:18 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineWildRunner
Obey little,Resist much

Registered: 02/13/05
Posts: 286
Loc: Where the wild things are
Last seen: 16 years, 9 months
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: Ped]
    #5259053 - 02/03/06 12:21 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Perhaps, could homosexuality be a form of natural evolution's population control?


--------------------
If you dont know where you're going, any road will take you there.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleeligal
Noobie

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/25/05
Posts: 7,021
Loc: California
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: WildRunner]
    #5259124 - 02/03/06 12:38 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

not too sure about that, theres been homosexuals throughout history. im sure it was around even in the caveman days, but maybe the need to reproduce was more dire and thus homosexuality was not as noticeable as it is today.


--------------------
\m/ Spanksta \m/

"do you have the freedom to do with your nervous system what you want?"

"MolokoMilkPlus said:
I'll respect you if you let me give you a blow job"

"tactik said:
respect the can."


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinekotik
fuckingsuperhero
 User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 06/29/04
Posts: 3,531
Last seen: 4 years, 2 months
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: eligal]
    #5259528 - 02/03/06 02:20 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

right, wrong.. so cares if you are gay. as long as we're talkin about chicks.


--------------------
No statements made in any post or message by myself should be construed to mean that I am now, or have ever been, participating in or considering participation in any activities in violation of any local, state, or federal laws. All posts are works of fiction.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineCherk
Fashionable
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/25/02
Posts: 46,493
Loc: International Flag
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: Ped]
    #5260253 - 02/03/06 06:29 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

I agree with a lot of your post ped.  A few years back I rushed into an encounter with another male in order to "see if I'm gay".  I reasoned that if I enjoyed it I was gay, and if I didnt then at least I would have learned something about myself.  In the longterm the experience just led to more confusion :confused:  There were too many thoughts racing through my head to allow myself to have the ones needed for a sexually gratifying experience.  I'm finally getting to the point where I can have a good laugh about it though :heart:


--------------------
I have considered such matters.

SIKE

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleeligal
Noobie

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/25/05
Posts: 7,021
Loc: California
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: kotik]
    #5260311 - 02/03/06 06:50 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

kotik said:
right, wrong.. so cares if you are gay.  as long as we're talkin about chicks.




ehehe, reminds me of a t-shirt i got. "i only agree with gay marriage if both chicks are hot"
:thumbup:


--------------------
\m/ Spanksta \m/

"do you have the freedom to do with your nervous system what you want?"

"MolokoMilkPlus said:
I'll respect you if you let me give you a blow job"

"tactik said:
respect the can."


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRavus
Not an EggshellWalker
 User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,991
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: Ped]
    #5260382 - 02/03/06 07:10 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

You're right, homosexuality does fly in the face of what we understand about the natural world and it's sustaining evolutionary process. All of our biological traits have arisen from the process of natural selection, whereby those traits most conducive to the continuity of the species are those which are expressed in generation after generation. Since homosexuality is completely contrary to the continuity of the species, in that homosexual beings are not inclined to reproduce, this would suggest that there is no biological element tending an individual toward homosexuality, and that homosexuality must therefore have it's roots in some mental, emotional, or spiritual phenomenon.




You would be right if everything was simply about reproduction, but that's not the case. Like in existence before essence in existentialism, in biology, it's survival before reproduction.

Seeing it in this light, it is entirely possible that we're just looking at one facet of biology, and ignoring all the rest. Homosexuality is not unnatural, because biologists have observed it in literally hundreds of other animals (over 450 different species, to be precise), from dogs to penguins to bonobos, lizards, hyenas, bottlenose dolphins, and the list goes on. So why do we think it's odd that humans have it? I'd be genuinely surprised if a lot of humans weren't gay or bisexual, personally.

Remember that survival, which is also a product of evolution, though still preceding the individual's sexual reproduction, is the first key we need to have any more evolution at all, we can look at homosexuality in a new light. For some of these animals, homosexuality allows bonding, ensuring that the organisms trust each other fully and can work together, as they know the other one is loyal (as is the case for male bottlenose dolphins). For others, homosexual relations can be seen along the same lines as head-butting, in that it's a way for males to assure their dominance over other males and later on claim the females.

We've even observed penguins who have a sort of monogamous "gay marriage" and refuse to separate with their partner, even when the caretakers try to coax them into mating with the other sex. Obviously, the situation is not as "unnatural" as some people would have you believe. After all, Darwinism works in strange ways sometimes.


--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleit stars saddam
Satan

Registered: 05/19/05
Posts: 15,571
Loc: Spahn Ranch
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: Ravus]
    #5260395 - 02/03/06 07:14 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Homosexuality also helps to control overpopulation.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDeviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 6 months
Re: is lezbianism wrong [Re: Ravus]
    #5260403 - 02/03/06 07:17 PM (18 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Ravus said:
Quote:

You're right, homosexuality does fly in the face of what we understand about the natural world and it's sustaining evolutionary process. All of our biological traits have arisen from the process of natural selection, whereby those traits most conducive to the continuity of the species are those which are expressed in generation after generation. Since homosexuality is completely contrary to the continuity of the species, in that homosexual beings are not inclined to reproduce, this would suggest that there is no biological element tending an individual toward homosexuality, and that homosexuality must therefore have it's roots in some mental, emotional, or spiritual phenomenon.




You would be right if everything was simply about reproduction, but that's not the case. Like in existence before essence in existentialism, in biology, it's survival before reproduction.

Seeing it in this light, it is entirely possible that we're just looking at one facet of biology, and ignoring all the rest. Homosexuality is not unnatural, because biologists have observed it in literally hundreds of other animals (over 450 different species, to be precise), from dogs to penguins to bonobos, lizards, hyenas, bottlenose dolphins, and the list goes on. So why do we think it's odd that humans have it? I'd be genuinely surprised if a lot of humans weren't gay or bisexual, personally.

Remember that survival, which is also a product of evolution, though still preceding the individual's sexual reproduction, is the first key we need to have any more evolution at all, we can look at homosexuality in a new light. For some of these animals, homosexuality allows bonding, ensuring that the organisms trust each other fully and can work together, as they know the other one is loyal (as is the case for male bottlenose dolphins). For others, homosexual relations can be seen along the same lines as head-butting, in that it's a way for males to assure their dominance over other males and later on claim the females.

We've even observed penguins who have a sort of monogamous "gay marriage" and refuse to separate with their partner, even when the caretakers try to coax them into mating with the other sex. Obviously, the situation is not as "unnatural" as some people would have you believe. After all, Darwinism works in strange ways sometimes.




over 450 species? i find that even more shocking.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Original Sensible Seeds Feminized Cannabis Seeds   North Spore Bulk Substrate


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* homosexuality
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
ribbit 9,288 105 01/16/03 02:44 AM
by TeTr0
* Racism, homophobia and homosexuality.
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Shroomalicious 6,322 76 12/17/02 07:36 AM
by Anonymous
* Right and Wrong
( 1 2 all )
CherryBomM 4,429 31 10/02/01 09:18 AM
by oneoverzero
* Importance of Genetic Homosexuality
( 1 2 3 all )
chemkid 4,935 55 12/21/02 03:39 AM
by nubious
* Genetics and Homosexuality------I don't think so
( 1 2 3 4 all )
chemkid 9,680 78 07/29/02 03:45 PM
by chemkid
* The one TRUE god. Everyone else is obviously wrong!
( 1 2 all )
el_duderino 1,636 25 10/20/04 02:46 PM
by Todcasil
* Homosexuality and The Bible
( 1 2 3 all )
RebelSteve33 6,119 45 09/09/02 11:33 AM
by Zahid
* Homosexuality and its Cause(s)
( 1 2 3 4 all )
DiploidM 5,890 73 10/26/04 03:11 PM
by kbilly

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
3,953 topic views. 0 members, 4 guests and 18 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.036 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 15 queries.