[nsfw] Masturbation Is A Homosexual Act

[MeDK]

There are no homosexual animals. EXCLUSIVE homosexuality (no interest in opposite sex) does not exist in nature. There are extremely rare cases of bisexuality and next to 0 involve actual penetration, just fake mounting which is a sign of dominance or play.

So what is an exclusive homosexuality? Because i would bet a lot of money that almost all if not all homosexuals are experimenting with the opposite sex. so no one is "exclusive" homosexual if there is to be no interest in the opposite sex.

But a lot of animals have shown homosexual activity, both with sex only and raising own "kids", penguins have done so. its even well documented in zoos also that penguins engage in same sex relationships.

 

[sachalamp]

So what is an exclusive homosexuality? Because i would bet a lot of money that almost all if not all homosexuals are experimenting with the opposite sex. so no one is "exclusive" homosexual if there is to be no interest in the opposite sex.

You're joking right? The whole premise of the homosexual is that he is not attracted or interested in women. One that is experimenting is called a bisexual. No interest in opposite sex means exclusive homosexual.

Raising the offspring is done so that two males can defend the nest better. They do not engage in homosexual acts (penetration).

Most of animals, over 99.999% do not engage in ANY bisexual act. Never.

 

[MeDK]

You're joking right? The whole premise of the homosexual is that he is not attracted or interested in women. One that is experimenting is called a bisexual. No interest in opposite sex means exclusive homosexual.

Raising the offspring is done so that two males can defend the nest better. They do not engage in homosexual acts (penetration).

Most of animals, over 99.999% do not engage in ANY bisexual act. Never.

Either you are religious and brought up with your "knowledge" or you just deny science in general.

But lets play around with your logics.

Who do I penetrate with i masturbate? (that is your definition of homosexuality)

and if you want to look into homosexuality in the animal kingdom, its called mounting. So its not a display of playing or dominance, its a sexual act. And when you do that search you will stumble into loads of animals that have homosexual activities both males and females. so your 99.999% is just a loads of BS

 

[sachalamp]

Either you are religious and brought up with your "knowledge" or you just deny science in general.

Why is it that every time i have this discussion one has to bring in religion into this? Did ANY of my arguments involve religion? No. Stick to refuting the arguments I provide and refrain from inventing others.

Who do I penetrate with i masturbate? (that is your definition of homosexuality)

Yourself, as a woman. You become a woman and get penetrated.

and if you want to look into homosexuality in the animal kingdom, its called mounting. So its not a display of playing or dominance, its a sexual act. And when you do that search you will stumble into loads of animals that have homosexual activities both males and females. so your 99.999% is just a loads of BS

There is virtually no penetration. It is not a sexual act if it does NOT involve penetration. There are very, very, very few instances of actual penetration happening.

No, you should look it up, homosexual/bisexual behavior, especially species wide (not talking about some random or erratic behavior) is extremely rare in animals.

 

[Ikarus]

Have you done a basic history check? There is no evidence it was widespread. NONE. Zero. Zilch. Nada. You can't imply it was "widespread" but repressed. In some societies it was not repressed but it was still extremely uncommon and specific to big cities only.

Asexual doesn't mean anything, it's just a sexual disorder. You can't not want a primary function (reproduction). That's why homosexuality is also a disorder.

Did you know there is 0 exclusive homosexuality in nature? Only extremely remote cases of bisexuality?

Also, what's with the dislikes, you getting triggered?

There is evidence that it existed within different cultures before religion, including Ancient Egypt and Ancient Rome. It was widespread for the population they had back now, in fact it probably had a similar probability as it does now but scaled down to fit the time period.

Asexuality isn’t a sexual disorder, it just means that you aren’t sexually attracted to men or women. Homosexuality isn’t a disorder either, it just means to be attracted to the same-sex. In that case, heterosexuality is also a disorder.

There are cases of homosexuality in nature, and you know that. I mean, it’s just not widespread, similar to humans. You can’t even dictate same-sex attraction in nature because there are several ways to interpret relations with animals.

I am disliking your posts because I dislike your posts. I mean, it’s not that deep. You’re just trying to assume that masturbation is what turns men into homosexuals, which is insanely stupid.

 

[Ikarus]

You're joking right? The whole premise of the homosexual is that he is not attracted or interested in women. One that is experimenting is called a bisexual. No interest in opposite sex means exclusive homosexual.

Raising the offspring is done so that two males can defend the nest better. They do not engage in homosexual acts (penetration).

Most of animals, over 99.999% do not engage in ANY bisexual act. Never.

Actually, someone who is experimenting is called bi-curious, with the purpose being to be aware of his sexuality. And, if you’re going to make the claims about animals, want to give us some statistics? I mean, to be a homosexual doesn’t make it exclusive around sex.

 

[sachalamp]

There is evidence that it existed within different cultures before religion, including Ancient Egypt and Ancient Rome. It was widespread for the population they had back now, in fact it probably had a similar probability as it does now but scaled down to fit the time period.

Asexuality isn’t a sexual disorder, it just means that you aren’t sexually attracted to men or women. Homosexuality isn’t a disorder either, it just means to be attracted to the same-sex. In that case, heterosexuality is also a disorder.

There are cases of homosexuality in nature, and you know that. I mean, it’s just not widespread, similar to humans. You can’t even dictate same-sex attraction in nature because there are several ways to interpret relations with animals.

I am disliking your posts because I dislike your posts. I mean, it’s not that deep. You’re just trying to assume that masturbation is what turns men into homosexuals, which is insanely stupid.

I dislike your posts too, but i don't push the dislike button, that seems a tad bit desperate.

I never said there it did not exist. It did. I said there is no evidence of it being widespread, considering the overwhelming civilizations (not just western ones) opposed the behavior.

Heterosexuality can not be a disorder because that's why sex organs exist.. to reproduce. Asexuality and homosexuality are, by definition, a disorder of reproduction.

I said there is no EXCLUSIVE homosexuality in nature. There is no instance in which a male, for all of it's life, ignores willing females and pairs with males only. There are extremely rare cases of bisexuality.

 

[ScaredOfBalding]

This is top tier trolling, good job.

 

[Ikarus]

I dislike your posts too, but i don't push the dislike button, that seems a tad bit desperate.

I never said there is no evidence it did not exist. It did. I said there is no evidence of it being widespread, considering the overwhelming civilizations (not just western ones) opposed the behavior.

Heterosexuality can not be a disorder because that's why sex organs exist.. to reproduce. Asexuality and homosexuality are, by definition, a disorder of reproduction.

I said there is no EXCLUSIVE homosexuality in nature. There is no instance in which a male, for all of it's life, ignores willing females and pairs with males only. There are extremely rare cases of bisexuality.

Stop whining over dislikes... Dislike my posts, it doesn’t bother me because you will just be adding to the collection.

There isn’t evidence for many things in ancient culture, but that doesn’t prove against it. Even with how the pyramids were built, that’s still questioned till this day because there isn’t much proof to suggest the methodology used to built the pyramids. That’s why theories exist, and most of what’s spoken about in regards to the past is theoretical.

But, reproduction isn’t the main purpose of us on this planet. I mean, it’s quite evident considering the overpopulation issue we endure nowadays. Relationships are based around love, and the outcome doesn’t have to be a child. Many heterosexual couples don’t have relationships to procreate, many don’t even want kids. And then there’s infertile couples who can’t have kids either.

Maybe in nature, they just don’t give a sh*t about the definitions of sexuality. Which is the most likely situation, and was the situation during the Ancient eras in history.

 

[sachalamp]

Stop whining over dislikes... Dislike my posts, it doesn’t bother me because you will just be adding to the collection.

I am not whining, i couldn't care less. It just seems weird to see that you're the only one obsessively disliking each post of mine. By all means do continue if it makes you feel good.

There isn’t evidence for many things in ancient culture, but that doesn’t prove against it.

Yes of course. However we have evidence that the vast majority of civilization did in fact REJECT masturbation. The only conclusion is that the behavior was uncommon at best.

But, reproduction isn’t the main purpose of us on this planet.

It actually is, for the most part. What i am saying is that is why the sex organs exist. For reproduction. That some use it for entertainment is just a derivative of their function, they could not benefit of the pleasure if the pleasure wasn't wired to encourage reproduction.

Maybe in nature, they just don’t give a sh*t about the definitions of sexuality

In nature they don't give a sh*t, that's why there is virtually no homosexuality and no "transgenderism".

 

[Ikarus]

I am not whining, i couldn't care less. It just seems weird to see that you're the only one obsessively disliking each post of mine. By all means do continue if it makes you feel good.



Yes of course. However we have evidence that the vast majority of civilization did in fact REJECT masturbation. The only conclusion is that the behavior was uncommon at best.



It actually is, for the most part. What i am saying is that is why the sex organs exist. For reproduction. That some use it for entertainment is just a derivative of their function, they could not benefit of the pleasure if the pleasure wasn't wired to encourage reproduction.



In nature they don't give a sh*t, that's why there is virtually no homosexuality and no "transgenderism".

I mean, it’s a button which takes one second to click. There isn’t much to feel.

What has masturbation got to do with my response?

Sex organs exist for pleasure and reproduction, but that doesn’t negate the pleasure part. I mean, the ideal situation behind sex is love rather than reproduction. In the future, if things can be done artificially, sex organs existing for reproduction would hit a dead and would be barbaric to class the act under reproduction.

In nature, to us it appears that they don’t care but we don’t truly know. And, we wouldn’t know if gender dysphoria existed in animals because we wouldn’t know of that either. I don’t even know the point of bringing up animals because animals and humans are entirely different, in regards to morals and our ways of living especially.

 

[sachalamp]

I mean, it’s a button which takes one second to click. There isn’t much to feel.

What has masturbation got to do with my response?

Sex organs exist for pleasure and reproduction, but that doesn’t negate the pleasure part. I mean, the ideal situation behind sex is love rather than reproduction. In the future, if things can be done artificially, sex organs existing for reproduction would hit a dead and would be barbaric to class the act under reproduction.

In nature, to us it appears that they don’t care but we don’t truly know. And, we wouldn’t know if gender dysphoria existed in animals because we wouldn’t know of that either. I don’t even know the point of bringing up animals because animals and humans are entirely different, in regards to morals and our ways of living especially.

Pleasure literally exists to drive reproduction, that is it's function. It would not exist otherwise.

 

[Ikarus]

Pleasure literally exists to drive reproduction, that is it's function. It would not exist otherwise.

Pleasure does not exist to drive reproduction. Most people nowadays, especially those who are younger, want the pleasure and don’t care for reproduction. It explains why many women are on contraceptives, to prevent pregnancy.

Anyhow, so what’s your ideas on what homosexuality is?

 

[sachalamp]

Pleasure does not exist to drive reproduction. Most people nowadays, especially those who are younger, want the pleasure and don’t care for reproduction. It explains why many women are on contraceptives, to prevent pregnancy.

Biologically, that's why the pleasure exists. To drive reproduction. Sure you can go ahead and f*** a goat, you're just tricking your brain that you're reproducing.

It doesn't matter what people care for, the response exists to drive reproduction.

Homosexuality is an aberration of the sexual response and a very disturbing way to respond to social hierarchy.

 

[Ikarus]

Biologically, that's why the pleasure exists. To drive reproduction. Sure you can go ahead and f*** a goat, you're just tricking your brain that you're reproducing.

It doesn't matter what people care for, the response exists to drive reproduction.

Homosexuality is an aberration of the sexual response and a very disturbing way to respond to social hierarchy.

Biologically, sex exists for reproduction. Pleasure exists to please us, and the outcome of children doesn’t please many. I mean, from a homosexual mans perspective, they find pleasure out of the feeling and feeling close to a man, and pursuing their sexuality. Reproduction would be a total boner killer for most, it’s not subconscious, neither is it wired in our brains.

And, your opinion of homosexuality is coming from a heterosexual male, which is typical. Actually, in that case, heterosexuality is disturbing because you are dooming this planet with overpopulation which leads to the worst outcomes. You are destroying this planet by procreating; heterosexuality is a modern day abomination.

If sex has one outcome only, which is procreation, why does sex lead to mental effects? It bonds people, and leads to closer relations. Although, it’s definitely not the core of a relationship, it’s an aspect which is important for many. What’s the point of sex for those on birth control or are infertile, in that case?

I’m aware that you are trolling, but at least be a good one.

 

[sachalamp]

Biologically, sex exists for reproduction. Pleasure exists to please us, and the outcome of children doesn’t please many. I mean, from a homosexual mans perspective, they find pleasure out of the feeling and feeling close to a man, and pursuing their sexuality. Reproduction would be a total boner killer for most, it’s not subconscious, neither is it wired in our brains.

And, your opinion of homosexuality is coming from a heterosexual male, which is typical. Actually, in that case, heterosexuality is disturbing because you are dooming this planet with overpopulation which leads to the worst outcomes. You are destroying this planet by procreating; heterosexuality is a modern day abomination.

If sex has one outcome only, which is procreation, why does sex lead to mental effects? It bonds people, and leads to closer relations. Although, it’s definitely not the core of a relationship, it’s an aspect which is important for many. What’s the point of sex for those on birth control or are infertile, in that case?

I’m aware that you are trolling, but at least be a good one.

That's not how it works and it shows you don't understand cause and effect. The cause of pleasure is reproduction. Pleasure's purpose is to encourage a behavior - in this case, reproduction. Pleasure doesn't "exist to please us". That's both redundant and ridiculous. Cause of pain is to discourage a behavior and to protect us. Pain does not exist to "displease us". You feel pain when to hit your face because the pain is there to discourage to repeat that behavior. You feel pleasure when your penis is stimulated because the body thinks it is reproducing.

Mental effects from sex are driven by the same objectives - raising offspring. Bonding is necessary to provide better chances for offspring.

 

[Ikarus]

That's not how it works and it shows you don't understand cause and effect. The cause of pleasure is reproduction. Pleasure's purpose is to encourage a behavior - in this case, reproduction. Pleasure doesn't "exist to please us". That's both redundant and ridiculous. Cause of pain is to discourage a behavior and to protect us. Pain does not exist to "displease us". You feel pain when to hit your face because the pain is there to discourage to repeat that behavior. You feel pleasure when your penis is stimulated because the body thinks it is reproducing.

Mental effects from sex are driven by the same objectives - raising offspring. Bonding is necessary to provide better chances for offspring.

Sex has pleasure to make the experience of procreating more pleasing. However, nowadays there is a separation of the intent of procreation and the pleasure of sex, that's evident and you can't even deny that. I mean, the definition of pleasure is to 'give sexual enjoyment or satisfaction to', in which homosexuals do not find sexual enjoyment or satisfaction in those who are of the opposite-sex. Maybe homosexuality exists to prevent the inevitability of overpopulation, you can't prove against that. Otherwise, if what you are saying about homosexuals is true, what is the solution to homosexuality?

We might as well disbanden sex since the point of procreation is no longer needed. We are not existing to procreate anymore, so hopefully evolution will take its route and get rid of things which aren't needed anymore. I would like to thank evolution for going my way.

What's your opinions on rape? Is it not rape because our intents are to procreate and raise offspring?

 

[Ikarus]

Looks like someone has a little obsession with masturbation and being gay...

 

[sachalamp]

Looks like someone has an obsession with my profile.

I said it and i am not going to say it again. Pleasure exists, biologically, to drive reproduction. The fact that this reward system can be tricked through various ways (contraception/homosexuality/masturbation/zoophilia/sexual fantasy etc) does not negate that fact.

 

[Ikarus]

Looks like someone has an obsession with my profile.

I said it and i am not going to say it again. Pleasure exists, biologically, to drive reproduction. The fact that this reward system can be tricked through various ways (contraception/homosexuality/masturbation/zoophilia/sexual fantasy etc) does not negate that fact.

Continue saying it, continue preaching your opinions on homosexuality on a hair loss website!