"It's totally okay if the girls are hot!": Hypocrisy and The World

[Twilight_guy]

Anyone who supports lesbian marriage only between good looking women is obviously only in that position to support his/her own sexual fascination with lesbian sex. That clearly shows that he/she is more concerned with his/her own pleasure then with rights and issues and I believe that that makes him/her completely immature. Why should anyone care what a bunch of immature people feel about an issue that they obviously aren't putting serious weight into? I have never encountered such as person (only people who are rabid supports or opposes) so I can't say for certain that these people aren't worth a second thought, but that's the first reaction that strikes me.

 

[Therumancer]

I mention NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) because they are powerful and well organized, and had my former employers intimidated enough where they were concerned over facing NAMBLA lawyers if there was an actual incident with a molestor. Interesting due to the fact that we treated everyone with kid gloves anyway. Really, that organization alone sort of disproves like 98% of the liberal "gay men are harmless" stuff out there. Check out their website sometime then think about how much support they must have to intimidate the world's largest casino when it's operating on a bloody Indian Reservation, with their security being what amounts to a dog and pony show anyway.

I'd like to make it clear, there is a difference between homosexuality and paedophilia. It's a fairly big difference, too. NAMBLA is a group that focuses on paedophilia, not homosexuality.
The majority of gay rights groups are extremely anti-NAMBLA, and have been for quite a while. Also, NAMBLA is now fairly defunct. It has nowhere near the power it used to.

In a general sense this is true, about homosexuality and pedophillia. However when it comes to gay men the two tend to go together.

Many wish to seperate the two, or claim that the link is an illusion. I understand why both personally and politically. But from actual experience and observation the two tend to go together, and have since ancient times since roman gays with their young boys (and probably before that).

Right now the civil liberties movement has convinced people that singling out any group of people or behavior for any reason is wrong. It's only been 50 years or so since the big victories in the 1960s. I can understand why a lot of people think like they currently do, but my experiences and observations have shown that they are wrong.

Truthfully just because you have a gay friend does not mean that they are going to be up front with you about child porn (if they are into it), also the gay rights movement has a vested interest in spreading propaganda and "research" disproving that link.

I'm so bigoted it's "funny" but then again that's because most of you have probably been educated in a very left wing fashion, and had 1960s style "tolerance of everything" drilled into your brains. Heck, the Baby Boomers still pretty much rule society. It's harder to deal with because of course most people will never be in a position to see otherwise.

I mean it's fine. You think I'm an amusing ill-informed stereotype, I think those I argue with are naive and ill informed.

NAMBLA is still as strong as always, it's just the kind of group that is promoting something that is currently illegal. It itself forms a link between homosexuality and pedophillia, which is also unpopular with the current gay rights movement which has a vested interest in seperating gay men from pedophillia. As such your not going to see them wandering around publically screaming "we molest children and think it's okay" or being publically invited to gay rights rallies.

Behind the scenes however they are very powerful. NAMBLA for example is going to send lawyers to defend child molestors and file counter-suits against their accusors (even if the guy is found guilty). They don't have the lawyers go forward and say in court "Your honor, my client is a child molestor, but since this is normal for him, he should be allowed to go free. Society should accept this kind of thing" rather they provide defense within the system and rely heavily on intimidation.

By the same token people funding NAMBLA for this stuff don't exactly put bumper stickers on their car saying "NAMBLA SUPPORTER: I'D LOOOVE TO MOLEST YOUR KIDS".

At any rate, I'm pretty much done with this thread. I'll read responses but I don't want things to get too nasty. Ya'll know my opinion, and I know yours. I doubt anyone is going to convince each other via internet discussion. Any way it goes any neutral observors have heard from both perspectives.

>>>----Therumancer--->





>>>----Therumancer--->

 

[metzger555]

How are you not a hypocrite saying you only want support from some particular people you like?
I can't help but condemn you for not picking your battles.
But it's just a charade for attention anyway, back to forgetting what I just told you.

 

[Same River New Water]

More than once I've seen gay-marriage stickers and the like saying "Support Gay Marriage if both chicks are hot." How does that, in any way shape or form, genuinely support the cause?

IMO: Discrimination against gays is a violation of basic human rights. Any level of acceptance is better than none. The "woo, lesbians!" brigade may be pig-headed and offensive, but they're still more open-minded than the people who think all homosexuality is wrong.

To draw an analogy to a totally different issue, they're like fox hunters: although they're cruel to the foxes, they'd still be outraged about cruelty to domestic dogs. That might make them hypocritical, but it still puts them above people who treat all animals cruelly.

The pun on "fox hunters" was unintended but welcome.

 

[Same River New Water]

Women have NOW, Latinos have LULAC, Blacks have NAACP, Gays have GLAAD, White Men have the KKK......wait, we have....well I'm sure at least we are represented by....

...every populist politician who claims to speak for "real Americans", i.e. most of Washington DC.

 

[Insanum]

Anti-homosexuality pisses me off.

-snip-

You mean homophobia.

At the end of the day they are entitled too theyre opinion. Personally what people with different preferences do in theyre bedroom is theyre own perogative. If they want too marry so be it.

I have joked about the "...as long as theyre fit" arguement, But i dont mean it.

Unfortunately democracy is in power & if the majority says no then all i can recommended is you move too a state that allows it (if your that way incined).

You get people taking the mick out of every class of people. If your included in that class then just turn the other cheek. all you can do.

 

[Biek]

snip

Let me get this straight. Your saying that even though I have nothing against homosexuality as a whole im not allowed to enjoy watching lesbian porn because I dont enjoy watching male gay porn?

 

[hypothetical fact]

Now I'm not some kind of big city biologist but it is in my humble opinion that men find 2 chicks going at it attractive because: (a) it shows that the women are sexually active. (b)there is a chance that the man can get in on a threesome for a much greater chance at producing offspring. Now the circular logic comes in when we realise that alot of women will feign lesbianism to get a man's attention but they only do this because a man is attracted to lesbianism in the first place. Either social development is flawed or at some point it was possible for the man to get in on the action to start the chain of men finding it atractive and women doing it to be found attractive. I'll put my money on this going back to tribes where a man could drag a woman away by her hair and impregnate her whether she was a lesbian or not.

As an addendum we must remember that whenever I make a post in a thread involving minorities I always oppose the minority so I'll just point out the hypocrasy between the OP's beliefs, as demonstrated in the title, and how the vast majority of yaoi fans are female. So this is clearly not just a one gender issue as the op makes out *couch*sexist*couch*. However a reason for women to find yaoi attractive when they were never in a position to buy a man from a tribe would be that perhaps homosexuality isn't an exclusive of homosexuals. It may also be psychologically ingrained as a sign of increased promiscuity, which is evident in the wide spread homosexual culture of the ancient greeks when there is no way that large of a population could have been maintained if they were all strictly gay.

So we have three possibilities:
1. It goes back to tribal times where a man could get a threesome out of lesbians.
2. It is a sign of increased promiscuity or the male is more in touch with their feminine side as gays tend to be.
3. Lesbians aren't as lesbian as they believe.

However, until we know more about our own history and more about our psychology these response are probably just as misguided as the Op's feelings that males must be hypocrites, which is just arrogant and presumptuous.

 

[hypothetical fact]

snip

Let me get this straight. Your saying that even though I have nothing against homosexuality as a whole im not allowed to enjoy watching lesbian porn because I dont enjoy watching male gay porn?

I'm 99.99% sure that's not what she's saying. I think she's saying you're not allowed to enjoy watching lesbian porn if you have something against *male homosexuals* and not wanting to watch gay male porn is no more an anti-male homosexual stance than wanting to eat oysters but not clams is an anti-clam stance.

Pun intended? No. Allusion to classic cinema intended? Yes.

As an addendum we must remember that whenever I make a post in a thread involving minorities I always oppose the minority so I'll just point out the hypocrasy between the OP's beliefs, as demonstrated in the title, and how the vast majority of yaoi fans are female. So this is clearly not just a one gender issue as the op makes out *couch*sexist*couch*.

Um, I'm not exactly sure of your point, but let me say that there's nothing about being a yaoi fan that implies being anti-female homosexuality.

I think you misunderstood the same way Biek did: the OP isn't talking about a contradiction in liking lesbian porn and not gay male porn, but rather, liking lesbian porn and not gay male *civil rights*

One is porn the other is civil rights how are they related? I could like necrophillia but that doesn't mean I'm going to jump up and down when graves are disturbed. If your interpretation is correct than the problem is that the OP is confusing base urges with rational thinking.

 

[Labyrinth]

snip

Let me get this straight. Your saying that even though I have nothing against homosexuality as a whole im not allowed to enjoy watching lesbian porn because I dont enjoy watching male gay porn?

No, I'm saying that what you shouldn't do is go out and bash a bunch of gay guys because they're gay and THEN sit back to enjoy lesbian porn.

 

[JaredXE]

Women have NOW, Latinos have LULAC, Blacks have NAACP, Gays have GLAAD, White Men have the KKK......wait, we have....well I'm sure at least we are represented by....

...every populist politician who claims to speak for "real Americans", i.e. most of Washington DC.

Really? Because not a single politician has ever claimed to speak for me. Might just be because I earn under 15k a year, don't have a car, don't donate to charities or politicians, and don't belong to a single special interest group. Well I do belong to one, it's just that no one thinks young white males are all that special or interesting.

 

[Labyrinth]

Really? Because not a single politician has ever claimed to speak for me. Might just be because I earn under 15k a year, don't have a car, don't donate to charities or politicians, and don't belong to a single special interest group. Well I do belong to one, it's just that no one thinks young white males are all that special or interesting.

As a 16-year-old metal head, I get ignored just as easily.

 

[theklng]

no amount of threads about hypocrisy in the universe can change the empiric fact that people are idiots.

 

[Same River New Water]

Because not a single politician has ever claimed to speak for me. Might just be because I earn under 15k a year, don't have a car, don't donate to charities or politicians, and don't belong to a single special interest group. Well I do belong to one, it's just that no one thinks young white males are all that special or interesting.

You're missing the point. As a working-class white male, you represent the "default" political constituent. Working-class white people are easily the largest and most widespread demographic in the USA; politicians have to court your vote more than any other, or they are marginalised or voted out entirely. Politicians just don't get labelled as speaking for white people or males, in the way that "black congressmen" and feminists and so on do, because white males are spoken for by everyone who isn't a special-interest politician. Most of Congress is made up of white males; admittedly their salaries are higher than working-class, but that comes with the job. "Mainstream" political issue are usually the things that concern working-class or middle-class white people.

The fact that America has only just now elected its first ever President who wasn't a white male - something nobody expected to happen anytime soon four years ago - should tell you that.

If you don't feel like any politician often makes decisions you agree with, perhaps your opinions are not typical among your demographic.

 

[hypothetical fact]

One is porn the other is civil rights how are they related?

It's hypocritical to find homosexuality pleasing when it's girl-on-girl pornography, but then have such a low opinion of homosexuality when it involves men that you're not even interested in supporting their civil rights.

That's the relationship I think the OP is going for.

It's hypocritical to spend a few minutes of work time talking around the water cooler but get angry when the mail man is late. I'm not sure what the term is but people generaly treat themselves different from the majority and cognitive dissonance does the rest. Yes you could call someone who litters in a park while putting all their rubbish in the bin at home a hypocrite but at the end of the day, unless they are willing to change, they won't.

Also as I said, the OP's problem goes deeper into the subconcious desires of people, that have little to do with the logical reasoning of their brain. Somebody may hate gays and like gay porn, they may even hate themselves for it. But if their hatred for gays is deeply ingrained, it will take alot more than pointing out hypocrisy to change them.

The best example I could give is a pedophile that knows they are a pedophile and know that pedophilia is a horrible thing to do. They are apposed to it and would prefer to be more average but at the end of the day they will still be attracted to children.