(untitled). . did you know? In "1955, Hugh Hefner agreed to publish in Playboy a short story about straight men being persecuted in a world where homosexuality
x
Click to expand

(untitled)

did you know?
In "1955, Hugh Hefner agreed to publish in
Playboy a short story about straight men being
persecuted in a world where homosexuality was
the norm. In response to the criticism, Hefner
replied, ''If it was wrong to persecute
heterosexuals in a homosexual society then the
reverse was wrong, too."
teru/ p/ tont
moo ook.
...
  • Recommend tagsx
+1600
Views: 70880
Favorited: 108
Submitted: 12/18/2013
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to shadowkingdr submit to reddit

Comments(390):

[ 390 comments ]
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#21 - shadowkingdr ONLINE (12/18/2013) [+] (6 replies)
stickied by shadowkingdr
ok to all you what if people in the comments section read the 			*******		 thing again its a response to criticism so 			****		 off
ok to all you what if people in the comments section read the ******* thing again its a response to criticism so **** off
#318 to #43 - smbiosis (12/19/2013) [-]
They've got some explaining to do in regards to the porn I've been watching.
User avatar #159 to #43 - mitchr (12/18/2013) [-]
Actually...
You need to login to view this link
It's a real thing.
User avatar #313 to #159 - Haentar (12/19/2013) [-]
Holy **** I thought you were talking about the nuns.
User avatar #435 to #313 - mitchr (12/19/2013) [-]
Ye- i mean no. tHey arEn't reaL at all! People don't just Monitor thE internet.
#167 - krakalisk (12/18/2013) [-]
Came for the content.

Stayed for the *********
#60 - AdamBaum (12/18/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#161 - pappathethird (12/18/2013) [-]
mfw these comments
mfw these comments
#52 - fuckoatmeal (12/18/2013) [-]
Pretty sure he is where stds came from
User avatar #95 to #52 - soupkittenagain (12/18/2013) [-]
#16......
#142 - sweetellie (12/18/2013) [-]
I remember watching a video with that exact premise in a learning for life video a few years ago.. The girls also had more tomboyish characteristics and the boys wanted to be more feminine. It was.. strange. I remember "Dirty Hetero" was the main insult used.
I remember watching a video with that exact premise in a learning for life video a few years ago.. The girls also had more tomboyish characteristics and the boys wanted to be more feminine. It was.. strange. I remember "Dirty Hetero" was the main insult used.
User avatar #147 - yuukoku (12/18/2013) [-]
Why would anybody be angry with him about that if they're pro gay marriage? His point was obviously the whole "You'd feel bad if it were done to you," thing because he knew exactly who his target audience was.
User avatar #136 - steelwoolsheep (12/18/2013) [-]
the comment section is a bunch of fedora wearing neckbeards thinking that they're 2edgy4u
User avatar #49 - mayorman ONLINE (12/18/2013) [-]
good guy hefner

doesn't mind it, if you take it up the ass
#233 - gaifgt (12/18/2013) [-]
I'm gay myself and if you think being gay is a choice, you are W R O N G!
How would you know if it's a choice or not if you're gay yourself?
Why would you even think that?
It's the 21st century, people.
User avatar #237 to #233 - shadowkingdr ONLINE (12/19/2013) [-]
welllll im not against gay people or anything (i have an even worse trait in the eyes of the public) but according to Freud being gay is caused by a dysfunction that happened during the phallic stage of your life *shrug* but i don't care
User avatar #280 to #237 - nimba (12/19/2013) [-]
Freud's work, though pioneering and thoughtful, is largely disreputable by today's standards
User avatar #241 to #237 - TheHutchie (12/19/2013) [-]
"According to Freud" is just code for "sounds smart but actually ******** ".

The guy wanted to **** his mother, and his entire outlook on psychology was some mental attempt at justifying it.
User avatar #242 to #241 - shadowkingdr ONLINE (12/19/2013) [-]
yeah so what he has a past everyone has a dark past if you can look past that they do great things even Hitler who was insane by today's standards did great things he took dinky little Germany which was then a rat-hole and almost took over the planet. Mandela was violent to a extreme yet the entire world morns his death. it is not our past that defines us but our achievements.
User avatar #243 to #242 - TheHutchie (12/19/2013) [-]
Everything you just said is irrelevant. All of it.

Freud didn't know what he was talking about. He was a psychologist who just made it up as he went along, and his psychology was ******** . He didn't do anything except lie, and you can't reasonably back up anything you ever say or do with "according to Freud".

I'm not expressing an opinion on Freud, and I'm not saying that he did anything right or wrong. I'm simply saying that anything Freud said about the human mind was only really about his own mind.
User avatar #246 to #243 - shadowkingdr ONLINE (12/19/2013) [-]
and why do you say that?
User avatar #250 to #246 - TheHutchie (12/19/2013) [-]
Freud believed that all neuroses were born from feelings of sexual inadequacy, and if anybody disagreed with him, he just told them that it was because they too felt sexually inadequate.

Essentially, his entire scientific following was a bunch of guys going, "I can't disagree with Freud or people will think I have a small penis."

He just manipulated people with dogma.
User avatar #253 to #250 - shadowkingdr ONLINE (12/19/2013) [-]
so your saying everything he has done is ******** ? where does this come from and before ou send me to some article make sure the doctor is reputable
User avatar #254 to #253 - TheHutchie (12/19/2013) [-]
So what exactly was your "worse trait in the eyes of the public"?
User avatar #255 to #254 - shadowkingdr ONLINE (12/19/2013) [-]
I would rather not say
User avatar #256 to #255 - TheHutchie (12/19/2013) [-]
Yeah, well if you're opting out of explaining that, then I have no reason whatsoever to continue this pointless twatfight over Freud.
User avatar #258 to #256 - shadowkingdr ONLINE (12/19/2013) [-]
what exactly does my trait have to due with this argument besides trying to divert the conversation?
User avatar #259 to #258 - TheHutchie (12/19/2013) [-]
Oh, I don't know, but what do Hitler and Nelson ******* Mandela have to do with Freud talking ******** his whole goddamn life!?
User avatar #260 to #259 - shadowkingdr ONLINE (12/19/2013) [-]
these people are famous figures in history and are completely impersonal and i was using them to say that a person should not be judged by there faults but by there achievements
User avatar #262 to #260 - TheHutchie (12/19/2013) [-]
And then I tried to explain that Freud's fault and his achievements are in fact, one and the same.

But you don't really seem to be reading what I type; in fact, you seem like one of those people who has a difficult time taking in anything outside of what's going on in your mind. Kind of like Freud, actually. It's like anything I say is lost in translation between your eyes and your brain, which I guess is also what happened during English class.
User avatar #261 to #260 - shadowkingdr ONLINE (12/19/2013) [-]
on another note until you show me proof we are done here
User avatar #264 to #261 - TheHutchie (12/19/2013) [-]
Not everything we read is on the internet my friend. You want me to go through my book collection and scan you the ******* pages?
User avatar #265 to #264 - gaifgt (12/19/2013) [-]
I just want to make out with you right now, man.
User avatar #267 to #265 - TheHutchie (12/19/2013) [-]
I'll pass, but thanks for the offer.

I have nothing against homosexuality, and I'm sincerely sorry if I've given that impression.

I just saw that this guy's talking some serious amount of senseless dribble and had to intervene.
User avatar #272 to #267 - Nullifier (12/19/2013) [-]
As a hard determinist, Freud's philosophy on psychology makes a lot of sense to me; perhaps not to the degree of attribution you cited, but to a lesser level.
User avatar #289 to #237 - thegrimgenius (12/19/2013) [-]
What is said trait?
User avatar #399 to #233 - reginleif (12/19/2013) [-]
Being gay may not be a choice, but what if we were to find out that it is a mutation?

If it is, then what would the FJ opinion be on ensuring that it never happens? In the long run it may just be better to assert homosexuality as a choice, since we can't control choices, but we can control traits.

Personally I think both outside environment and genetics can play a part. So if a gay "cure" is discovered then it won't be 100% effective.

User avatar #438 to #399 - rubric (12/24/2013) [-]
no **** sherlock, every damn thing that makes you diffirent from everyone else is a mutation, thats what mutations are, what you think that everyone looks diffirent for ***** and giggles?
User avatar #275 to #233 - shemaledong (12/19/2013) [-]
People are just afraid of their own gay feelings. I apologize for my fellow heteros.
User avatar #277 to #275 - gaifgt (12/19/2013) [-]
What is there to be afraid of? Be yourself!
It's better to be an original than a copy.
0
#276 to #275 - gaifgt has deleted their comment [-]
#230 - darkangeloffire (12/18/2013) [-]
I can't be the only one who wants to read this story.

Pic semi-related
User avatar #238 to #230 - shadowkingdr ONLINE (12/19/2013) [-]
wheres this from?
User avatar #239 to #238 - darkangeloffire (12/19/2013) [-]
I think a gay furry comic. I forget where I saw it, perhaps the **** Furry board.
#268 to #239 - slenderwolf (12/19/2013) [-]
I believe you are correct, I have the same pic somewhere in the depths of my reaction folder.
I believe you are correct, I have the same pic somewhere in the depths of my reaction folder.
User avatar #248 to #239 - ugottanked (12/19/2013) [-]
name is cross-platform
User avatar #249 to #248 - darkangeloffire (12/19/2013) [-]
Ah, there we go
User avatar #251 to #249 - ugottanked (12/19/2013) [-]
ever need a name to another comic like the one above just let me know
User avatar #252 to #251 - darkangeloffire (12/19/2013) [-]
I'll make a note of it, thanks
User avatar #207 - traffy (12/18/2013) [-]
I always feared my mom will end up with him
User avatar #25 - hoban (12/18/2013) [-]
Who reads anything in that playboy? i thought it was an excuse to have it for the articales
User avatar #86 - orrisic (12/18/2013) [-]
Homosexual isn't natural. You can't even reproduce in a homosexual world.
User avatar #176 to #86 - gtk (12/18/2013) [-]
To be fair, there are asexual organisms, as well as organisms that can take on either gender roll. Its not too much of a stretch to say that one of these species could develop to the point where they would have this homosexual society.
User avatar #286 to #86 - nimba (12/19/2013) [-]
troll troll is troll
#312 to #86 - anon (12/19/2013) [-]
because we are pack animals, and rely on social construct just as much as reproduction. why do you think elderly live way past menopause by your logic woman should die as soon as they're unable to make babies. but they don't, why? so they can help raise the young. more people looking after fewer children>less people looking after more children =healthier generation. same theory can be applied to homosexuality, maybe in that in that manor, but the point that survival of the species is more complicated that just "make more of" stands.
User avatar #112 to #86 - leonhardt (12/18/2013) [-]
Nice bait, lol
User avatar #114 to #112 - orrisic (12/18/2013) [-]
So you're saying you can reproduce?
User avatar #117 to #114 - leonhardt (12/18/2013) [-]
Nope. I'm pointing out your thinly veiled "I'M TROLLING YOU" attempt.
User avatar #140 to #117 - lordmoldywart (12/18/2013) [-]
Even though I disagree with orrisic, saying 'hurr durr you're a troll' isn't making you look smart
User avatar #177 to #140 - leonhardt (12/18/2013) [-]
I was not trying to look smart.
#169 to #140 - hillbillypowpow (12/18/2013) [-]
He's level -325. there's not much to say to him.
User avatar #216 to #114 - heartlessrobot (12/18/2013) [-]
Gay guys can jerk off in a cup, lesbians can use a turkey baster or something to get it in their vag. Reproduction does not necessitate sex. HOWEVER! I see no reason why people can't be whatever sexuality they wish. Homosexual is not better than straight is not better than bisexual is not better than pansexual is not better than asexual is not better than homosexual. Whoever you want to **** shouldn't decide how good or bad of a person you are.
User avatar #160 to #86 - elmarcocfc (12/18/2013) [-]
I've seen better bait on a boat.
#191 to #160 - slysixtyfourwii (12/18/2013) [-]
I've seen better bait in a stangers van.
#80 - ghostxbabyy (12/18/2013) [-]
if being gay isn't a choice and your born with it then would that make being gay a mental disorder??
User avatar #81 to #80 - hadrian (12/18/2013) [-]
No. It was removed from the DSM in the 70s.
#96 to #81 - ghostxbabyy (12/18/2013) [-]
but it should still be seen as one really
User avatar #166 to #96 - mrsaytan (12/18/2013) [-]
Why exactly?
#174 to #166 - ghostxbabyy (12/18/2013) [-]
that comment sounds wrong in all honestly and not how i meant it to sound, all i was trying to say is that being gay is a disorder within the mind making it a mental disorder (this does not mean it is a bad thing)
User avatar #257 to #174 - hadrian (12/19/2013) [-]
Being in love with someone is not a disorder.
User avatar #181 to #174 - mrsaytan (12/18/2013) [-]
Faults in brain are defined by men. Before that they're merely occurrences, some unwanted and disadvantageous. Some, like homosexuality, are thought to be faults or disorders, but why should they be? Yes, they're exceptional, but not harmful nor do they make social interactions harder in anyway. If homosexuality was a disorder, wouldn't any kind of sexuality that doesn't involve breeding be a disorder too?
Well, it depends on what is thought to be a fault.
#183 to #181 - ghostxbabyy (12/18/2013) [-]
i would say that any sexuality that docent involve breeding depending on the circumstances(if you want throw me some examples of what you mean) could be considered as a mental disorder.
User avatar #192 to #183 - mrsaytan (12/18/2013) [-]
Well, maybe I was thinking more about fetishes or stuff like that than sexuality. Anything where the thing is something else than to stick a weewee in a vajayjay. Are they disorders as well? I wouldn't call something a disorder just because they feel sexual attraction for something else than to the babyhole. And again, they would only be faults defined by humans.

For mankind sex isn't meant for breeding purposes only. Actually, I think 90% of human sex on earth is just for pleasure anyway. It isn't that important for humans to feel attracted to the opposite sex as it is for other animals, so I don't really see it as a fault to be gay.
#199 to #192 - ghostxbabyy (12/18/2013) [-]
this is a very valid comment personally i dont see fetishes as mental disorder yet again possibly depending on the fetish i would say that a fetish is different as i am more on the emotional side of being gay then the actual act of sex
User avatar #381 to #199 - mrsaytan (12/19/2013) [-]
Nothing is ever black and white so it's good to think outside the box than to just choose "a side". While I see some points in your opinion, the reason why homosexuality isn't a disorder is that it shouldn't have any relevance in our society.
#412 to #381 - ghostxbabyy (12/19/2013) [-]
i have to say your comments have made the most sense and most reasonable out of everyone else but if thats the case some other disorders that are not severe should not be seen as disorders
User avatar #417 to #412 - mrsaytan (12/19/2013) [-]
I just think that anything that doesn't actually make your life any harder and by this I mean something that is coming from one's body, not the attitudes towards one's dissimilarity shouldn't be labeled as a disease.
#421 to #417 - ghostxbabyy (12/19/2013) [-]
a disease sounds harsh i dont mean it that way, i think the main thing that i am getting from these comments(not just yours in general) is that everyone assumes that a mental disorder is a way of lowering somebody which i disagree with
User avatar #426 to #421 - mrsaytan (12/19/2013) [-]
I understand that you're not ill willed, but disorders in your papers usually have some kind of setback. Let's say an employer won't hire you because homosexuality is listed as disorder in you papers. It shouldn't be anyone's, especially employer's business to know their employee's sexuality.
It sounds ridiculous that someone wouldn't hire a person based on one's sexuality, but it happens.
#427 to #426 - ghostxbabyy (12/19/2013) [-]
now that i can 100% agree with but there can be a box for sexual preference anyway and as far as any mental illness goes if it docent stop you doing the job it should make no difference in you getting thee job which would make homosexuality an irrelevant illness in the case of finding a job a it shouldn't stop you doing any job
User avatar #432 to #427 - mrsaytan (12/19/2013) [-]
Yeah, it shouldn't make any difference, but it does for some people. It's actually prohibited to ask the applicant about his/her sexuality for this exact reason.
-2
#190 to #80 - admiralamory **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#197 to #190 - ghostxbabyy (12/18/2013) [-]
i think my comment above has my reply to this included as well so check it out and reply if you feel im wrong or i have changed your mind
User avatar #211 to #80 - gryphemthegryphon (12/18/2013) [-]
Technically, it is a choice on a certain level, but it's a choice of personal preference that can't be simply changed by a "Oh, I guess I'm gonna be straight now."

It's like, but not as dramatic as, saying "I really like rock, but I can't stand rap or country, but I guess I should like country and rap because you said so."
#218 to #211 - ghostxbabyy (12/18/2013) [-]
as a straight male i would say i have no choice but to be straight i cant see it being any other way for homosexual people, i would like a homosexual to tell me what they think though
User avatar #220 to #218 - gryphemthegryphon (12/18/2013) [-]
When I say it's a choice based on personal preference, I'm saying a gay man would have to see a woman they find absolutely amazingly sexy, enough to want to have sex with her, to be convinced. The same thing goes for you, as a straight man, you'd have to see a man who is sexy enough to want to have sex with him to convince you otherwise, but other you usually just aren't convinced to have sex with a man as a gay man isn't generally going to be convinced to have sex with a woman.

It's like, but not as severe as, loving or hating a certain food.
#224 to #220 - ghostxbabyy (12/18/2013) [-]
i have never realistically thought about having sex or had a an attraction to a man although i could agree a guy was considered good looking if he was it is a totally different feeling to being in love with them or having sexual feelings for them
User avatar #287 to #80 - nimba (12/19/2013) [-]
not born with it, issue resolved
User avatar #84 to #80 - orrisic (12/18/2013) [-]
It should be, but it's not.
#164 to #80 - krakalisk (12/18/2013) [-]
If it were a disorder it would be harmful or detrimental to their lives. Homosexuality isn't harmful, the homophobics are.
You could argue the lack of reproduction as a harmful trait, but it doesn't harm the individual, and at this point not even the species. Really what you should is ask is why does lack of reproduction matter in a world with 7.8 or so billion people and mounting?
Bottom line, too, just appreciate your fellow man/woman for their personality, not how they identify.
#172 to #164 - anon (12/18/2013) [-]
>Homosexuality isn't harmful
Does AIDS ring a bell?
User avatar #186 to #172 - JwBread (12/18/2013) [-]
Because heterosexual couples can't get AIDs from sex...
#170 to #164 - ghostxbabyy (12/18/2013) [-]
not all disorders are harmful/detrimental though, i know a vast majority are but not all of them and some have negatives and positives to them just like most things. i agree homophobics are harmful to society as a whole, i am not trying to be homophobic
User avatar #308 to #170 - krakalisk (12/19/2013) [-]
And some psychologists argue that homosexual and heterosexual sexualities are both "Normal aspects of human sexuality."

People make the mistake of putting sex = reproduction. Sex serves much more in human culture than reproduction.
#409 to #308 - ghostxbabyy (12/19/2013) [-]
sex is more then reproduction but reproduction is impossible without sex we enjoy reproduction as it is natures way of getting us to have sex to reproduce if we created life another way then sex wouldnt stimulate us the same way as are bodies would react differently to the act of sex
User avatar #415 to #409 - krakalisk (12/19/2013) [-]
Not at all, we already have tons of ways to reproduce, sex is kind of out dated, but we do it anyway because it's natural and to be honest, keeping sex around isn't a bad thing. Cloning, artificial insemination and so much more are different options.
#418 to #415 - ghostxbabyy (12/19/2013) [-]
ok sex is the only natural way of reproduction would be a better way to have put it but the point still stands
#307 to #170 - krakalisk (12/19/2013) [-]
Yes, but: "A mental disorder or psychiatric disorder is a mental or behavioral pattern or anomaly that causes distress or disability, and which is not developmentally or socially normative."

You can argue that homosexuality isn't a social norm, but just fitting that catagory doesn't make it a disorder in itself.
#410 to #307 - ghostxbabyy (12/19/2013) [-]
it isn't developmental either ?
User avatar #414 to #410 - krakalisk (12/19/2013) [-]
Sexually speaking it is completely normal, the fact it's with a man doesn't change the psychology behind it.

Being a top or bottom does change the psychology behind it, but straight people can be tops or bottoms as well. (Submissive or dominant).

#416 to #414 - ghostxbabyy (12/19/2013) [-]
im on about the emotional feelings a lot more then the physical aspect of it
User avatar #419 to #416 - krakalisk (12/19/2013) [-]
You'll be disappointed to find out homosexuals are no different from heterosexuals in that way xP
Yes there are some scientists who try to show the neurology behind homosexuals are different to that of heterosexuals, but the information in that aspect is getting disproven more and more by modern science.

Bottom line is, I'd stick to listening to the professionals in the American Psychiatric Association before you listen to bias radio news or bigots haha
#420 to #419 - ghostxbabyy (12/19/2013) [-]
what i mean by that is they emotionally fall in love and physically get aroused by those of there own sex rather then those of another sex if there was no difference in how they emotionally feel that would make it there choice to be gay which isn't the case
User avatar #422 to #420 - krakalisk (12/19/2013) [-]
the only difference is in attraction to the male or female sex, your assumption that this makes the neurology and emotions behind it is ill-advised.
The neurology of a straight male who like being dominated is the same as one who likes to dominate. Homosexuals have the same exact brain as heterosexuals lmao. People make the assumption that they're so different because they feel same sex is completely alien, when it entirely is not
#423 to #422 - ghostxbabyy (12/19/2013) [-]
but something in your mind is telling you to be attracted to the same sex emotionally you are not emotionally attatched to dominating or being dominated that is just something you enjoy
User avatar #425 to #423 - krakalisk (12/19/2013) [-]
The thing is there are only correlations between differences in neuroanatomy between homosexuals and heterosexuals. Until anything is proven, I'm going to say the lifestyle of a homosexual

A) Has no impact on my own, unless I actively take part in the gay rights movement

B) Is not harmful to society in any forseeable way


When you get right down to it, as long as they're happy and no one is hurt, there should be no problem with it
#428 to #425 - ghostxbabyy (12/19/2013) [-]
there shouldn't be a problem with it, your right. what that makes it sound like you are saying is that anyone with a mental disorder is harmful to society, has an impact on you and there not happy and hurt people (i know thats not what you meant by it but taking homosexuals out of the list of mental disorders for those reasons suggests that those with mental disorders have to do those things )
User avatar #429 to #428 - krakalisk (12/19/2013) [-]
I'm sorry, but, by definition to have a mental disorder is to cause distress or disability to the individual. A homosexual being... homosexual doesn't cause distress or disability
User avatar #424 to #423 - krakalisk (12/19/2013) [-]
Not in your mind haha, that's where the genetics play a role.
#184 to #80 - thegreathoodoo (12/18/2013) [-]
Asks an honest question. Gets thumbed down.


That seems like a perfectly reasonable response...
#185 to #184 - ghostxbabyy (12/18/2013) [-]
thank you someone understands. im not here for the thumbs as long as people either read what i am trying to say and bring something to the discussion then thumb me however you want to
User avatar #106 to #80 - shadowkingdr ONLINE (12/18/2013) [-]
it would be a trait not a disorder
#122 to #106 - ghostxbabyy (12/18/2013) [-]
but as the human species goes a male has to be with a women to reproduce and continue the human race so surely it would be a disorder ??
User avatar #137 to #122 - nucularwar (12/18/2013) [-]
there's too many of us anyways, maybe it's a natural failsafe against overpopulation?
#148 to #137 - ghostxbabyy (12/18/2013) [-]
valid point but how would that change the fact of it being a disorder or not ?? + im not meaning this in an offensive way what so ever dont get the wrong idea
#152 to #148 - nucularwar (12/18/2013) [-]
In that case being a monk or any sort of celibacy, or just deciding you don't want to have kids would also be disorders
#153 to #152 - ghostxbabyy (12/18/2013) [-]
thats a choice not a mental block on you having kids though right ?
User avatar #154 to #153 - nucularwar (12/18/2013) [-]
I think there's too much stigma attached to the word "disorder"
even if you don't mean any offense with it, the word itself is offensive by definition
#155 to #154 - ghostxbabyy (12/18/2013) [-]
well then why wouldn't it be classed as offensive to all the other disorders out there? i understand where your coming from though
User avatar #5 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
While I agree with him fundamentally, I also thing the logic is quack.


You could say the same thing to justify all sorts of 'wrong' behaviors.
User avatar #56 to #5 - Crusader (12/18/2013) [-]
Not really, most other "wrong" behaviours are actually harmful at some point to others.
User avatar #62 to #56 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Aids hurts people. Torn colons and large intestines hurt people. Anal bleeding, tearing, and the septic nature of your ass can lead to all sorts of medical problems ranging from infections to internal bleeding. Your ass ain't naturally lubricated, and that soft membraneous tissue can easily be damaged by accident.

Not saying ass-play ain't fun and awesome. Just saying that homosexuality kills more people per year than pedophilia.
User avatar #293 to #62 - nimba (12/19/2013) [-]
>Cause only gay people get AIDS
User avatar #66 to #62 - Crusader (12/18/2013) [-]
Are you saying that these things are exclusive to homosexuals?
Those things in general kill more than pedophilia, but those things happen with straight couples as well.

Show me hard statistics showing that more people die per year as a result of homosexuality than people are traumatized by pedophilia.
User avatar #68 to #66 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
And DEFINITELY more people are traumatized by pedophilia.

Have you not seen that video about the sex trade in the philipines, with web-cam stuff with minors? Millions of kids dude. Millions.
User avatar #70 to #68 - Crusader (12/18/2013) [-]
Ok, I don't see your argument here then.

Homosexuality harms people on a consentual level, which kills a few hundred a year
Pedophilia is just abuse, which kills and traumatizes millions

Yet this argument we use for the support of homosexuality is invalid because you can use it for pedophilia?
User avatar #72 to #70 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
It's a philosophical argument dude, stick with me. I'm asking what actually separates homosexuality from pedophilia in the general sense. You could make a case for how evil and dangerous marijuana is by how many mules, suppliers, and users get killed in the drug war. Doesn't mean the drug is dangerous in it of itself.

What exactly separates pedos from homos in terms that would show how one is moral and the other not.
User avatar #76 to #72 - Crusader (12/18/2013) [-]
Well, Homosexuals don't create unhealthy relationships with power imbalances due to a lack of knowledge/experience, and they don't traumatize their partners.

My arguments have nothing to do with gender, my issue is with age.
Two guys that date where one is 25 and one is 12 is just as bad as a guy and a chick, or a chick and chick.
User avatar #83 to #76 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
What if the kid is the dom?

Rofl, but really. What you're implying is that all young love is unhealthy. There will always be a power imbalance, and in the man on girl love situation that is exaberated by the man's phsyical strength and size. Would you then say that hetero sex is wrong because it's an unhealthy dispersion of power in the relationship? Can a woman not give consent?
User avatar #85 to #83 - Crusader (12/18/2013) [-]
1 - Not all young love is unhealthy, because young love is usually between two people of equal ignorance, they are both young

2 - If the relationship is so offset by the man's strength, then yes, it is unhealthy.

3 - Yes a woman can give consent, but there is actual consent and the "consent" pedophiles get where it's pressure.
User avatar #89 to #85 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
The second has zero experience. (is experience the deciding factor in ability to give consent)?
User avatar #87 to #85 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Then what about between one young person with a lot of sexual and other 'world' experience, and another, of equal age and the exact same gender? Would that be immoral too?
User avatar #88 to #87 - Crusader (12/18/2013) [-]
Yes, if they are pressuring the person, which is where the relationship becomes unhealthy.
User avatar #94 to #88 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
or even worse, the old man is a virgin, and the kid out of symathy seeks to educate and help him! XD
User avatar #93 to #88 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
and half retarded.
User avatar #92 to #88 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
and to compound the problem, the kid is much stronger. Say the adult is an old man.
User avatar #91 to #88 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
What if, in a pedo scenario, both are inexperienced and neither pressures the either?
User avatar #67 to #66 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Maybe that would be a good argument against anal in general, then?

#26 to #5 - anon (12/18/2013) [-]
is this bitch ass ***** fo real , wot hte fuk homie
User avatar #6 to #5 - shadowkingdr ONLINE (12/18/2013) [-]
well your morality is just a lasting stain left by religion you have to make your own idealism while crushing the ones that cause the most grief using anything possible
User avatar #9 to #6 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Also, I hate religion more than most normal people, and have very good reasons too, but I'm not about to go around hating on people just because they're too weak minded to know better.

If something makes you happy, and if it isn't hurting anyone else, it shouldn't matter what it is specifically that you're doing. You should be allowed to do it. Even if its borderline evil.
User avatar #7 to #6 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Imagine it with pedophilia then. Lets say that just because you can reverse something and have a society where pedophilia is the norm and non-pedophilia is 'outlawed', doesn't make the former suddenly right nor the later wrong. In both universes pedophilia is still evil.
#10 to #7 - angelusprimus (12/18/2013) [-]
I think you missed the point.
He is saying that prosecution is wrong. He doesn't make judgement calls on if homosexuality is right or wrong, just that prosecuting people on being different is wrong.
User avatar #12 to #10 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Scenario time! (while I wait for you to answer).

Suppose I was a father of a little girl. I decided, in this enlightened day and age, that when she turned twelve that I was going to give her the D as a birthday present, because that is how I had chosen to raise my child. In an idealistic society, would you or would you not persecute me for such a decision?
User avatar #11 to #10 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Is it wrong to persecute pedophiles then?
#15 to #11 - angelusprimus (12/18/2013) [-]
Yes it is. Very simply because its a crime where there is abuse involved.
Comparing homosexuality to pedophilia is just sick. One is an act between two willing, fully aware people, other is an act of abuse by person with power over a person not developed enough to know whats going on or defend itself.
One is an act of love, or passion, other is an act of violence.

Heffner made a very clear example. He didn't say "Prosecuting anyone is bad because social norm could change" he said "If homosexuals prosecuting heterosexuals is bad, then reverse is too."
User avatar #18 to #15 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
So, then, what is the difference between a 17 and an 18 year old (or, as in some states, a 15 and 16 year old)? Why is the difference of just a day of age so significant?

Aren't you just being intolerant of other peoples love, just because you don't agree with it or understand it? They're not hurting anybody. Why all the hate?
User avatar #28 to #18 - kanadetenshi (12/18/2013) [-]
Because at a younger age they are not cognitivally nor biologically ready for sexual intercourse.

What is good or bad isn't based on your perception, it's based on facts. And the fact is that pedophillia harms while homosexuality does not.
User avatar #31 to #28 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
The reason I'm using Pedophilia in my arguments, dude, is two-fold.

#1, Homo and pedo are both very similar in a lot of ways, especially in regards to the issues we're talking about.

#2. I'm showing you what the argument looks like from my side, and you don't like what you're seeing. If you were standing where I was standing right now you'd look a whole lot like a homophobe... or a pedophobe as the case may be. XD
User avatar #34 to #31 - kanadetenshi (12/18/2013) [-]
1. No it's not, heterosexuality and homosexuality are more related since both are based on adults giving consent. Pedophillia isn't. Seriously people have been explaining this multiple times now already, seriously.

2. Uhm no you're simply making a strawman, and i am trying to educate you on your poor argumentation using logic.
User avatar #30 to #28 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Biologically you say? Cognitively you say?



Once upon a time both were used as reasons through which to criminalize and persecute gay people, you know? It was treated as a mental illness, and because the ass ain't designed to harbor big things pummeling their way in and out of it, all sorts of medical problems tend to crop up around the gay lifestyle.
User avatar #32 to #30 - kanadetenshi (12/18/2013) [-]
Back then psychology and psychiatry where extremely early concepts and we had barely any idea how it worked. Now with advancements in neurology and evolutionary psychology we have far superior methods to determine what is psychologically good or not. And no ******* an underaged child is not psychologically a good thing for the child.

And yet the g-spot is located in the anus.
User avatar #33 to #32 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Medically, homosexuality is still seen as either a mental or biological condition that may or may not be connected to either genetics or other health conditions.
User avatar #35 to #33 - kanadetenshi (12/18/2013) [-]
It's connected to neurology aswell as epigenetics. Are you even remotely qualified to talk about biology? Do you even have any knowledge on the matter aside from your highschool biology 101 book?
User avatar #38 to #35 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
I might ask the same of you, actually. Gay men's CT scans follow the archetype of women's brains. Gay men also have an exaggerated tendency to have pituitary and other hormonal conditions. Being gay is, actually, quite similar to being a serial killer, in that there are certain odd biological and psychological markers that keep popping up and we're not really sure why, because nobody really cares enough to look deeper into it.

Personally I think it's another form of population control wired into our genetics, just like ticks control the population of deer, and is a natural thing that shouldn't necessarily be demonized..... but, once again, ALL THE SAME THINGS CAN ALL BE SAID ABOUT PEDOPHILIA.

I challenge you to make me one arguement for your case that wouldn't also make the exact same case for pedo's everywhere.
User avatar #41 to #38 - kanadetenshi (12/18/2013) [-]
Which only proves my point that it is connected to neurology.

Also that's a false analogy, just because the same happens with serial killers doesn't mean it's remotely based on the same cognition, you just dishonestly took the worst example you could give, but forgetting the fact that most child prodigy's and geniuses also have odd neurological markers.

Furthermore there is no such thing as population controlling genetics, that's not remotely how evolution works, it doesn't make specific genetics for a purpose, it's based on random genetic recombinations that is refined by natural selection. What it really is is that it's a form of social bonding within mammals, like female bonobo's having sexual intercourse to create bondship with eachother.

I already gave my argument, homosexuality is based on consent and hurts nobody, pedophillia does. Yet you don't even bother refuting it and instead trying to side-step this blatantly obvious fact. You're willfully ignorant.
User avatar #45 to #41 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Does having sex with a minor really hurt them? It's accepted fact that minors will have sex with each other, so what is the problem with a slightly older person doing exactly the same thing?

And yes, homosexuality kills loads of people. Just look at africa and the aid's epidemic... and not to mention all the torn or ruptured rectums and lower intestines that people give themselves from trying to imitate porn stars and shove too-huge things up their bump or otherwise do things nature never intended for them to do.

I agree that anal feels good, and hell, maybe I'd enjoy having sex with another man. Not sure. Will likely never give it a try so long as I have a say in the matter, and unless I have a say I likely won't enjoy... but I digress. Gay people go to the hospital a WHOLE lot more than straight people, simply because anal sex isn't exactly 'safe' or natural at all. Of course, in the search for sexual creativity, what wouldn't we stop at? People have sex with horses for christs sake... which I totally condone.
User avatar #51 to #45 - kanadetenshi (12/18/2013) [-]
I have never seen 5 year olds having consensual sex with eachother. If you're referring to teens then it only shows how retarded you are for not knowing the difference between pedophillia and ephebophillia.

If we are going to talk about issues like statutory rape laws then that's a complete different and debatable issue, but here's an article lining up arguments from both sides: www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/13/findlaw.analysis.colb.statutory.rape/index.html


Oh yes because homosexuality is the only way to get HIV hurrrrr durrrr. The aids epidemic in africa is caused by the catholic church teaching them not to use condoms, it has nothing to do with homosexuality, in fact homosexuality is mostly banned in africa. Plus straight people have statistically more anal than homosexuals.

Horses cannot give consent. Seriously if i have to mention to your dense ******* brain what consent is ONE more ******* time then we're done with this conversation since arguing with you is a waste of time.
User avatar #59 to #51 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Soooo.... you're saying that alll the data that exists that says that you're much, much, much more likely to contract aids if you're a homosexual is just all puffs of smoke then. Sounds legit.

I agree about the Catholic Church. They're a bunch of assholes. Can't deny a combination of homosexuality and promiscuity is a cause of Africa's problems, not just lack of easy access to condoms, though.

And what if I don't give consent to an animal? What's going on there! Neither one of us wants to engage in sex, but there I am, getting raped by a dog or something. **** happens dude, and I know a lot of pet freaks would be very angry at you for not recognizing their animals emotions as being legitimate and real and to be respected. Even goats and dolphins.

So consent is the only thing determining the legitimacy in your eyes then. Fine. What constitutes consent? Give me your definition of that real fast so I can destroy it.
#149 to #59 - angelusprimus (12/18/2013) [-]
No not puff of smoke. Just about 20 years out of date.
Also while its a bit more likely that male homosexual will get aids then heterosexuals, spread of aids among lesbians (who are also homosexual) is negligable. Combining statistics for homosexual males and females and heterosexuals you get that homosexuals are actually slightly less likely to contract aids.
User avatar #151 to #149 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Well I think we can all agree that lesbianism is totally cool and fine, right? =D
User avatar #71 to #59 - kanadetenshi (12/18/2013) [-]
That's extemely exegaratted. But that's not the point, i know you're more likely to get HIV from homosexuality but that doesn't change the fact that it happens a lot in heterosexual couples aswell, if HIV is your justification to call it a bad thing then by your logic so is heterosexuality.

There is only one country that has proper laws for homosexuality, homosexuals barely even get the chance to have sex there, so no homosexuality is not the cause of africa's problem, no condoms and poor/no medical treatments are.

We don't consider the actions of animals to be up par with humans. If an animal eats a human we try to shoot it, but we don't call the animal a crazy immoral murderer like we do with humans. Furthermore animals by definition cannot give consent to sexual intercourse because they don't understand human language and cognition, yes they understand what mating is there is no evidence to even remotely suggest that animals understand the situation when people try to have sex with them.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent I mainly refer to informed consent, but besides that consent isn't the only thing determining it, what also determines is the harm done intentionally with malice aforethought.
User avatar #82 to #71 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Also, animals can in fact know exactly what the situation is, and what is going down. Dolphins, for instance, engage in recreational sex all the time. So do most whales, a lot of monkeys, and a few other notable mammals that I've forgotten. Interspecies sex isn't exactly uncommon either.

In these ways sex with animals is just as natural as homosexuality.
User avatar #79 to #71 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
And what about sex with the mentally handicapped? Can they consent at all, and if so, at what age would that come about?
User avatar #78 to #71 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
And a better way of putting it... what if someone has matured extremely slowly (like in anime sometimes) and turns 18 without having fully sexually developed. Would it be immoral, then, to have sex with them because they can't consent?
User avatar #77 to #71 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
I don't read links dude. Put it in your own words or not at all.

Well said about the HIV thing, but its still a general fact that homosexual intercourse is a good deal riskier than straight-up missionary with the missus. You simply can't dance around that fact. Its riskiness isn't quite on part with, say, anal sex with a horse... but it's still not quite vanilla. Vanilla is boring though, so I can see how you might want to mix up your night life.

And yes, in fact, Africa's horrid sexual practices are the source of it's current AIDS delemna, and there is absolutely no getting around the fact that both Africans perform a hugely disproportional amount of it as well as the fact that anal almost always involves blood... which if you know anything about HIV, blood is a bad thing. Sex with women also includes a surprising amount of blood too, but still not nearly the same.

Really the only 'safe' sex is masturbation. With a glove. By yourself. But again, we start to yawn... and in any case we're losing sight of the real argument again.

Back to consent!!!

What I think you're trying to get at is the legal age of consent... which would be a good argument if it weren't for the fact that that arbitrary number changes wildly from state to state, and nation to nation. So what is the actual, moral, real age of consent? It would likely change from person to person... so how would we tell when it has been reached, and if, say that age is 9 years old, would it be acceptable to then proceed to consummate the marriage?
User avatar #104 to #77 - kanadetenshi (12/18/2013) [-]
Alright then, have fun living in your own ignorance.
User avatar #110 to #104 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Meh. I probably will. Problem with people like me is we get away with things. I wouldn't say that I capture and torture to death wild animals, buuuuut... I would say that I'm not exactly a normal individual, and maybe that's a bit scary but it's reality. Personally, bestiality, homosexuality, and pedophilia really are all fine by me. They're all just facets of the exact same gem.
User avatar #100 to #77 - kanadetenshi (12/18/2013) [-]
Oh so now you're even refusing to read sources facts? Then i'm done arguing with you.


User avatar #102 to #100 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Linking to wiki is like me winking you to 4chan. I don't care to read a book every time you reference one.
#179 to #45 - digress (12/18/2013) [-]
Man, these mentions provide a good read.
User avatar #209 to #179 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Rofl, it was fun writing them too. ^^
User avatar #13 to #11 - shadowkingdr ONLINE (12/18/2013) [-]
flacon read it again he is responding to criticism he did not just say it out of the blue
User avatar #14 to #13 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
I suppose he did... but I still think the train of logic is extremely flawed. Still, we can't all be scientific in our approaches to philosophy, can we? Most people are too stupid to be moved by anything less than emotion anyway. XD
#17 to #14 - anon (12/18/2013) [-]
His logic isn't flawed. He wasn't just replacing the social norm with something more socially deviant and pointing out the moral contradiction behind it all. He was illustrating how tenuous the line that separates homosexuality and heterosexuality truly is, and thus why it would be morally wrong to chastise one and not the other. He's not comparing apples with oranges but rather oranges with mandarins, which is why his dissertation works.
User avatar #19 to #17 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
And you, sir, aren't listening. What I'm saying is that his metaphor is absolutely NOT a proof, one way or another, of the morality or righteousness of homosexuality. You take his entire story and replace it with pedophilia and it wouldn't change anything other than your perception. The only thing this story DOES do is garner pity for gay people.

If you were to try and say anything else you'd need to first also stand your ground and say that man-boy love is a beautiful, natural, and right thing to happen between a man and a boy. If you can't say that, then don't try to use the exact same argument to garner sympathy for gays you ******* retard.
#400 to #19 - anon (12/19/2013) [-]
Read what I was saying again, idiot. He's simply discussing just how interchangeable heterosexuality and homosexuality can be, and how history could have easily taken a completely different turn. He's also appealing to his demographic (straight men) by proposing these what if scenarios, and allowing them to see the fallacy in stigmatizing a certain sexual orientation.

The reason why it does not work for pedophilia is because the difference between liking an immature girl opposed to a grown woman are not as trivial as the difference between liking a man or a woman. It's more than a question about age. It's a question about sexual maturity, cognitive maturity, and a whole lot more.

You don't just get an argument and supplant its subjects with seemingly analogous terms. This doesn't prove whether the logic is fallible or not simply because they are not similar. That in itself is a logical fallacy.
User avatar #408 to #400 - PgFalcon (12/19/2013) [-]
And I'm saying that in the same way you're saying homo and hetero are the same the same arguments could be made case by case for pedo. You're not accomplishing anything, but the illusion is there so you dance around and say "look at this! Ain't I the smarterest philosophier of dem all? I sure showed those haters what for!"


What you don't understand is that I totally agree with you. I don't think homosex should be such a big deal. What you also don't get is that I feel similarly about things like bestiality and pedophilia... and I'm pointing out that these arguments all work for those things too, so unless you condone all of the above it's dangerous for you to be saying 'tolerance at all costs!' like you seem to be doing.

Idiot.
User avatar #8 to #6 - PgFalcon (12/18/2013) [-]
Reapply as necessary with slavery, rape and subjugation of all women, self-mutiliation, etc... etc... until you realize the argument is flawed.



I don't have anything against gays myself. Hell, I too enjoy seeing a weiner every now and then... but just because something looks right doesn't mean it is.
#283 - anon (12/19/2013) [-]
Or maybe heterosexuality is essential to life and in an intolerant homosexual world life would be over after 1 generation...
User avatar #303 to #283 - hueyfreeman (12/19/2013) [-]
dude we don't need any more ******* people ok

like what, 1 tenth of society is gay, so 10% of people aren't reproducing.

We've still got like 3 ******* babies being born every time a person dies.
#306 to #303 - gigabowzer (12/19/2013) [-]
No isn't that we don't need more people, but we need less idiots in this world...

Once we colonize other planets overpopulation won't matter.
User avatar #97 - danmanjonesnz (12/18/2013) [-]
being straight in a homo society would be slightly more weird than being gay in a straight society. Attraction to the opposite sex is kinda weird in and of itself. Girly girls wanting manly men & vice versa.
User avatar #48 - xenophaigus (12/18/2013) [-]
The hell... This is top content with 175 thumbs?
#53 to #48 - nutspangler (12/18/2013) [-]
funny junk must not be at prime time
User avatar #65 to #48 - mogred (12/18/2013) [-]
check your inbox addy has new system
[ 390 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)