Gays/lesbians And Being Armenian

Now you're using a passive sentence and using the words "was considered," after I pointed it out. You were not saying that before.



Don't act like you have never derided me for not wanting to multiply the Armenian race.



You adhere to the dominant political system, because you can't handle difference. Ironically, the one thing you continuously pound on is that "we are not the same!" and yet you wish for us all to live and think the same as you. And in your case, that means: heterosexual, white, male.



Ah, so you admit that rights are handed out, and hence they can also be taken away? Whatever happened to your libertarian views of let everyone do as they wish?

As for gay parents raising gay kids, you have consistently ignored the answers given before.

And no, I still do not believe that a homosexual act necessarily equates homosexuality. Just because someone experiments or becomes involved in a homosexual act does not make them homosexuals. If they were homosexual, then they would go beyond that. Once again, ask a heterosexual inmate which of the two he prefers: getting sucked by a man or penetrating a nice hot vagina? Chances are VERY big that he will choose the vagina. That makes him a heterosexual by nature, not a homosexual, even if he engages in homosexual acts in prison.

Finally, let us for a moment assume that homosexuality is contagious. What bothers you so much about it? Afraid that homosexuals might take over? That you might become one yourself? And so what if they do take over, or you do become one? What are so afraid of? Scared to lose your white, male, heterosexual supremacy? Scared that mankind will cease to exist? Boo-hoo, boo-hoo. Get over yourself.

Here are a few links:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7791888/

http://en.wikinews.o...ht_on_sexuality

http://www.geocities...1/biobasis.html


No, I don't think that homosexuality is influenced and given my experiences at the hands of the Catholic clergy at a tender age, I should be an advocate of that theory of yours.

Well, when you put it THAT way

What if you give him the option: Getting sucked by a sexy hot chizzled male underware model or doing a cold hairy snatch with fluid that looks and smells like old yellow yoghurt oozing out of it.

Sip, I would assume that a homosexual wouldn't choose a vagina, no matter how hot, wet, and nice it was. He would probably also not choose to penetrate a fat, hairy, pus-infected anus.

This is simply false. Pose a question and I will have an answer. I will not dodge it.

I am not trying to attack you and I am not making you the subject of my replies. It is just extremely difficult (impossible) to argue/discuss anything with someone who routinely engages in specious arugments and sophism.

I could (and have) given you countless examples of how you make implicit assumptions, but you just deny making the assumptions without explaining how else you arrive at your conclusions.

Even THIS VERY POST doesn't bother to correct the inconsistency! Look! You just admited that Foucault should be given some sort of higher credence because he is gay, but yet you criticise Nairi for using her boyfriend's experience as evidence and phantom22 for using his experience as evidence. Why are Foucault's opinions about sexuality any more valid than Nairi or phantom22's? I'll tell you why. You are using the tactic of accepting what gay people say as more true when they support your opinion, but then reject it as anecdotal when it doesn't support your opinion.

My problem with you is that I can't tell if you are disingenuous (that is, you get what you are saying is crap and you intentionally dodge the questions that weaken your arguments) or if you are not that bright and really think that you are arguing brilliantly and that we're missing the point. Again, I am not trying to frame this as a personal insult. It's just that if it's the former, then there is no point in arguing with you. If it's the latter, maybe there is hope.

Շատ շնորհակել եմ որ հիմա ես մածուն չեմ կարող ուտել...

Ինչ երեւակայություն ունեք!

Why are we down to the penetration of vaginas or anuses? Is that all there is to sexual attraction for hetersexuals or homsexuals? What about romance? Tender affection? etc?

For Arman (who likes to hide behind Anonymouse), love is apparently a moot point. I brought it up earlier.

Sip started it.

Have you responded to this?

Please answer the following:

(1) How is it shoved down your throat?

(2) What is the alternative; that is, what is your ideal "role" for gay people (how can they behave/live) so that it isn't shoved down your throat?

(3) How is any restriction on them consistent with a libertarian viewpoint? Also, if your concern is marriage rights or other privileges, why aren't you just anti-marriage, not anti-gay marriage? How is singling out certain groups' receipt of privileges/rights consistent with a libertarian perspective?

That was probably one of the highlights in this thread...when Anonymous (Arman?) said that gays are not about love at all based on I guess his personal opinion and then he basically said, I know phantom22 just said he was in love, but that doesn't go with my point, so I have to discredit your REALITY to make way for my (unsupported) THEORY!

Brilliant!

While that was going on we were both having sex with women.

Both the conservatives and the homosexual lobby approached the AIDS crisis from their very narrow perspective. Never has there been such a disastrous move in American epidemiological policy as in the early 1980's.

Arman belongs to the leftover rascals on Armenian Club. He has proclaimed himself a superiority figure there among a bunch of ignorant kids who admire him for every word he says. No wonder he feels like a minority on this forum, where people are a little more mature and capable of seeing through his nonesense.

Ke neres ... bayts deghin hotats matsunen el udelu hamar lav chi

There is some un-needed sick, really disgusting suggestive literature in this thread.

Why am I still reading it?

That Foucault considered, or considers if he stuck in a time warp, is no difference. The point was that in relation to the modern identity of the homosexual, all previous generations and societies had considered it as a tendency, a behavior, referred to it as an act, as the Greeks did, called it sodomy, etc. You still have no ammo here except mutating and morphing little words here and there to come off as somehow proven a point. What I have said before and now, is quite apart from what Foucault himself said, so if you are intentionally going to manipulate who said in a 'he said/you said' prism you may as well retire from all human contact and conversation.



This is all a hodge podge of unsubstantiated assertions and innuendos that have no bearing on anything I have said. You, like vahan, have repeatedly twisted my positions in an effort to have some ammuniation in a discussion. You make a bold claim of me supporting the "dominant political system" (without defining whatever that is, and whatever it may be), nor do you offer evidence of how I tie in to whatever this "dominant political system" is. Furthermore, you go on to claim that I cannot handle "difference" because I said I personally do not like homosexuality. How does expressing a personal preference translate to not handling differences? It beats me, but apparently in the warped minds of the tolerance police that's what it means. I have repeatedly stated I support a homosexuals right to be a homosexual and live as a homosexual. I have even stated numerous times against the case in Iran where they hung those homosexuals teens and am against sodomy laws. So for you to sit here and intentionally obfuscate the truth to somehow appear on the moral high ground on the internet so everyone in your internet community of allies who support homosexuality can see is desperate at best.



This is another perfect example of twisting what I have said. You will of course ignore this along with the myriad of other intentional distortions. In debates this tactic is referred to as assigning certain positions or arguments to others which they did not make and it is often done in the case of interrogations and questioning. These methods have been used by Soviets, Nazis, Americans, and it is a form of question that is ironically also used by lawyers when they question their clients or witnesses to get as much truth and light on a case as they can.

First, there is nothing I am hiding about saying certain rights are handed out to homosexuals. That is merely stating a fact. Because the State has a monopoly on violence and the rule of law, therefore it does hand out laws, such as granting homosexuals civil unions. So I see no point in you pretending as if I am stating something that somehow supports your argument so much that it makes mine moot. Second, you have no idea of what libertarianism is or the philosophical underpinnings of that concept, by stating "everyone do as they wish". That is not what libertarianism is about, but it is relevant since it shows your ignorance as well as derails the thread even more.




That's like the pot calling the kettle black. I posted a study about this which was ignored. I kept raising it again only to fall on blind eyes. And now you state that somehow I am the one that ignored this point. Just what "answers" were given before Oh Mighty One.



What you believe is irrelevant, for numerous sociologists and psychologists have referred to the phenomenon that occurs in prison as homosexuality, by virtue of engaging in such an act. That you personally find a problem with it because it offends your enlightened and eclectic tastes of tolerance has no bearing on anything. And even though many of those inmantes would want to bone a woman the first chance they got, they could still be labeled as "bisexual". However, this still misses the point because homosexuality is homosexuality. People at that moment (regardless of whatever circumstances) express a desire and some even develop a desire for the same sex. Who are you to say they don't? Earlier you argued for desire and could it not be possible that these people based on environment develop a desire? We are not mind readers so don't pretend to be. And this would also fall in line with how certain lesbians parents raised children who are more likely to consider homosexuality.



Yes, I am afraid homosexuality will take over and I will become one myself. Such silly insults do not even merit a serious response. You, much like vahan, have proven time and again that you cannot separate emotions from any discussion because liberal/egalitarian positions often are interwoven with emotional tantrums and often involve going from the subject and making the other person the subject.

Thanks for the links, but it doesn't look good for you to dodge the issue I raised about homosexual parenting.

Consider the study published in The American Sociological Review in April of 2001 titled "Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter?" by USC professors Judith Stacey and Timothy J. Biblarz.

But look at how fixed you are in your position and stance of intolerance to not even consider that homosexuality can at least potentially be induced by environment. Notice, I have not discredited nor denied the biological aspect, but you seem to entirely rule out the nurture aspect. Not very tolerant and open minded of you.

I agree and apologize on the behalf of the forum. BTW, welcome on hyeforum.

Ahh so this is what was lurking in the stomach of nairi. She wanted to make this personal and I can do that. I have apparently driven her to such a point that her distaste and intolerance of me came out full swing. Notice how I have maintained at least modicum of cordiality here to not let things get too heated, but apparently my continued expression of my views has earned me the ire of the Dutchess from Holland, who from time to time likes to pretend she is the most Armenian of Armenians because she has read more Armenian literature than anyone else, and can actually type in Armenian font online! Hooray! The rest of us are only fakes, fools and knaves.

And you use my name in such a way as if accusing me of hiding. From what I am only left wondering. My friends and foes use my name. You are neither. You are not a friend, and you do not even have the respect of being my foe. You my dear, are nothing more than the insignificant urchin of Armenians. All you have ever done and accomplished in your life is always getting the last word in internet discussion forums because all you have ever amounted to is sitting in your room, in front of the computer all day. No matter what time of day I post, you are there with your itchy finger on the buzzer with a reply. It's as if you sit there with your mouse on the "quote" and "reply" buttons waiting incessantly for that darn ole rascal Anonymouse (read Arman) to post his intolerant and rigid views so that you can have some tiny fragment of meaning and excitement in what is a very dry, lonely, nihilistic and defeatist life.

You yourself like to pretend and come off on the moral high ground of all things, the enlightened savior, the bastion and beacon of tolerance and those like me are the archenemy of all that is goodness and light in the world. You like to pretend you are so unique and misunderstood, but you have in reality closed yourself off from the world. You like to think you are so unique and that customs and respect do not apply to you. You even refuse to go to a wedding because you cannot wear your jumpsuit. You claim you are misunderstood, but one wonders, how would that even be, if you are not even willing to show a tinge of respect to someone to dress approprtiately on their wedding. Not everything in life revolves around you maa'aam. So here you are in your mid-30s, socially isolated, in the same league as other feminazis that have graced these and other forums over time, such as Stormig the Stormtrooper and other variants, in control of their men (when they do not themselves look like the men), and riding out the years as dried fruits, getting all worked up by the replies of some intolerant yokel called Anonymouse (read Arman). And is this the excitement in your life? Is this the ebb and flow which you have anticipated since in the womb? Please tell me otherwise!

Edited by Anonymouse, 10 June 2007 - 09:26 PM.