|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 6:33 am
Marshal67 George Bush and the Patriot act disagree with you. Prove this please, and you own morals and values are not good enough proof. Then how about a little bit of proof from someone with no values to speak of? Of course it's wrong to interfere. The United States has made it their business to interfere, but that doesn't make it right. Besides, PATRIOT and PATRIOT II are primarily terrorism-related in nature. And President Bush is full of s**t anyway. Otherwise, yeah, no qualms from me. I think that people should do what the ******** they want, and not listen to me or my opinions. Except where it concerns me. In that case...I know people that say that they're cool with it as long as they don't get hit on. I say that if I'm not getting hit on...what's wrong with you? I'm sexeh.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 12:22 pm
Cougar Draven Marshal67 George Bush and the Patriot act disagree with you. Prove this please, and you own morals and values are not good enough proof. Then how about a little bit of proof from someone with no values to speak of? Of course it's wrong to interfere. The United States has made it their business to interfere, but that doesn't make it right. Besides, PATRIOT and PATRIOT II are primarily terrorism-related in nature. And President Bush is full of s**t anyway. Otherwise, yeah, no qualms from me. I think that people should do what the ******** they want, and not listen to me or my opinions. Except where it concerns me. In that case...I know people that say that they're cool with it as long as they don't get hit on. I say that if I'm not getting hit on...what's wrong with you? I'm sexeh. Exactly! I really don't understand people who are like "AS LONG AS THEY DON'T HIT ON ME LOL" I mean, I have no qualms with girls flirting with me. Maybe it's just different attitudes, though. I guess I'm okay with people who say the above, though I don't understand their position, but what I'm not okay with are people who are like "If a gay person hits on me, I'll SMASH HIS/HER FACE IN." Take it as a compliment, not some sort of breach of your wo/manhood. Damn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 3:25 pm
Lykus Cougar Draven Marshal67 George Bush and the Patriot act disagree with you. Prove this please, and you own morals and values are not good enough proof. Then how about a little bit of proof from someone with no values to speak of? Of course it's wrong to interfere. The United States has made it their business to interfere, but that doesn't make it right. Besides, PATRIOT and PATRIOT II are primarily terrorism-related in nature. And President Bush is full of s**t anyway. Otherwise, yeah, no qualms from me. I think that people should do what the ******** they want, and not listen to me or my opinions. Except where it concerns me. In that case...I know people that say that they're cool with it as long as they don't get hit on. I say that if I'm not getting hit on...what's wrong with you? I'm sexeh. Exactly! I really don't understand people who are like "AS LONG AS THEY DON'T HIT ON ME LOL" I mean, I have no qualms with girls flirting with me. Maybe it's just different attitudes, though. I guess I'm okay with people who say the above, though I don't understand their position, but what I'm not okay with are people who are like "If a gay person hits on me, I'll SMASH HIS/HER FACE IN." Take it as a compliment, not some sort of breach of your wo/manhood. Damn. It's people like that who bother me severely. I respond universally with "I think you're sexy. This is my shillelagh. Care to continue this conversation outside, bisexual-leaning-toward-homosexual man to victim?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:24 am
I am pansexual. I do not believe that somebody should limit themselves to a single gender preference title. It is quite a shame when somebody falls for somebody of the same gender, but denies or suppresses the feelings because he or she is expected by title, to be straight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 8:18 pm
What about *****, zoophiliaics, or necrophiliacs? Should they be afforded the same assent as pansexuals, bisexuals, heterosexuals, and transsexuals?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 11:40 am
My Conscience What about *****, zoophiliaics, or necrophiliacs? Should they be afforded the same assent as pansexuals, bisexuals, heterosexuals, and transsexuals? Those are not sexual orientations, not on their own. Sexual orientation implies the atraction to a specific sex(es)/gender(s). Last time I checked, children, dogs, cats and corpses wheren't sexes/genders... So, at best they can be considered extensions of sexualities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 2:52 pm
RMarques My Conscience What about *****, zoophiliaics, or necrophiliacs? Should they be afforded the same assent as pansexuals, bisexuals, heterosexuals, and transsexuals? Those are not sexual orientations, not on their own. Sexual orientation implies the atraction to a specific sex(es)/gender(s). Last time I checked, children, dogs, cats and corpses where sexes/genders... So, at best they can be considered extensions of sexualities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 9:54 am
RMarques My Conscience What about *****, zoophiliaics, or necrophiliacs? Should they be afforded the same assent as pansexuals, bisexuals, heterosexuals, and transsexuals? Those are not sexual orientations, not on their own. Sexual orientation implies the atraction to a specific sex(es)/gender(s). Last time I checked, children, dogs, cats and corpses wheren't sexes/genders... So, at best they can be considered extensions of sexualities. Then pansexuality is not a sexual orientation. I quote you: "Pansexuals, are people that attracted to people no matter if they're a man, woman, mtf transgender, ftm transgender, hermaphrodite, etc."I don't recall humans being a sex or gender.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 9:59 am
My Conscience RMarques My Conscience What about *****, zoophiliaics, or necrophiliacs? Should they be afforded the same assent as pansexuals, bisexuals, heterosexuals, and transsexuals? Those are not sexual orientations, not on their own. Sexual orientation implies the atraction to a specific sex(es)/gender(s). Last time I checked, children, dogs, cats and corpses wheren't sexes/genders... So, at best they can be considered extensions of sexualities. Then pansexuality is not a sexual orientation. I quote you: "Pansexuals, are people that attracted to people no matter if they're a man, woman, mtf transgender, ftm transgender, hermaphrodite, etc."I don't recall humans being a sex or gender. Well, gender is mental, so taking a closer look, it's not really relevant. However, for sex, you can say that they are attracted to all sexes, be it male female or the un-named in between. So, pansexuality remains as a sexual orientation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 2:47 pm
RMarques My Conscience RMarques My Conscience What about *****, zoophiliaics, or necrophiliacs? Should they be afforded the same assent as pansexuals, bisexuals, heterosexuals, and transsexuals? Those are not sexual orientations, not on their own. Sexual orientation implies the atraction to a specific sex(es)/gender(s). Last time I checked, children, dogs, cats and corpses wheren't sexes/genders... So, at best they can be considered extensions of sexualities. Then pansexuality is not a sexual orientation. I quote you: "Pansexuals, are people that attracted to people no matter if they're a man, woman, mtf transgender, ftm transgender, hermaphrodite, etc."I don't recall humans being a sex or gender. Well, gender is mental, so taking a closer look, it's not really relevant. However, for sex, you can say that they are attracted to all sexes, be it male female or the un-named in between. So, pansexuality remains as a sexual orientation. So I could say that necrophila is a sexual orientation. It is a hetero, homo, bi, or pansexual attraction to a someone with a specific characteristic about them. For some people this specific character can't be someone who is black, or mexican, or caucasian. It just happens that this specific characterisitc is of the dead nature. So technically we shouldn't call it necrophila unless you wanna call all preferences a -phila; emophila, asianphila, tallphila, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 6:50 am
My Conscience RMarques My Conscience RMarques My Conscience What about *****, zoophiliaics, or necrophiliacs? Should they be afforded the same assent as pansexuals, bisexuals, heterosexuals, and transsexuals? Those are not sexual orientations, not on their own. Sexual orientation implies the atraction to a specific sex(es)/gender(s). Last time I checked, children, dogs, cats and corpses wheren't sexes/genders... So, at best they can be considered extensions of sexualities. Then pansexuality is not a sexual orientation. I quote you: "Pansexuals, are people that attracted to people no matter if they're a man, woman, mtf transgender, ftm transgender, hermaphrodite, etc."I don't recall humans being a sex or gender. Well, gender is mental, so taking a closer look, it's not really relevant. However, for sex, you can say that they are attracted to all sexes, be it male female or the un-named in between. So, pansexuality remains as a sexual orientation. So I could say that necrophila is a sexual orientation. It is a hetero, homo, bi, or pansexual attraction to a someone with a specific characteristic about them. For some people this specific character can't be someone who is black, or mexican, or caucasian. It just happens that this specific characterisitc is of the dead nature. So technically we shouldn't call it necrophila unless you wanna call all preferences a -phila; emophila, asianphila, tallphila, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 9:01 pm
What I feel most people fail to see is that Heterosexuality is NOT a default that other things are abnormal. Heterosexuality is a MAJORITY.
People dont think that having brown eyes is a default, and anything else, blue or green is an abnormality. They are simply variations. Well, sexuality isnt all that different, ya know?
So do what you like. It takes courage to stand out against the norm and embrace who you are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tzeentch The Mutator Crew
|
Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 1:52 pm
I don't know. I'm fine with people being different but, if you ever want to hold the gay/lesbian movement back it's by having gay pride parades. All it ever seems to be are a bunch of guys dancing in leotards, a bunch of guys dressed like half-naked bikers, etc.
It' never just shows a gay guy, and then you go "Woah that guy is gay? He looked like most other people I know. Which is really what most gay guys I know are like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
