[Kulturkampf]

Originally Posted by kahljorn

"First, it is simply that there is a higher percentage of homosexuals with these issues -- much higher level"

Like I said, I've been in mental institutions before and most of the crazy people there weren't gay. Most of them were straight. I don't really think real craziness has anything to do with sexual orientation unless you think thinking about fat cocks can change your chemical makeup or brain structure. The only thing I can imagine coming out of it really wouldn't be craziness so much as a bad growth process mostly attributed to enviromental conditions. AKA, you. In fact, in all truth, most homosexuality could probably be related to enviromental conditions, aka you.
If all you're saying is that they are "Emotionally sensitive" we'll have to take a few paths here. First off, "Real men" have this thing with hiding their feelings (which would almost make them seem more sensitive) , everybody knows that, so who knows how emotionally sensitive they are. Secondly, gay people are generally harassed all the time (Everybody gets emotionally sensitive when they are being harassed) and some of them try to be more "Feminine" or open. Females are typically more emotional than males. This could be because they simply aren't psuedo-desensitized and/or because of hormonal reasons, but regardless the possibility that some gays are "Overly sensitive" compared to normal men is so moot in it's entirety it doesn't really require notice. Thirdly, men are more likely to get angry. Anger is emotional sensitivity.

thanks for your anecdotal rant that is....

irrelevent.

"I been to a mental institute and I met a lot of straight people, and I think gays aren't feminine, they are just open and sensitive, and etc. etc."

Superb!

I am not sure where the argument is. Let's try to be more concise and brief, to the point.

"I am great that you feel your personal experiences can stand in the way of actual, scientific polls"

They weren't scientific polls, the supposed scientificness of the poll you posted was already denied. The organization responsible for it has been ousted from the psychiatric community and none of their papers have been published. I understand, in the begining, you thought they were valid and now you are apparantly laughing at it like it's a joke. Nervous tinges.

They do not write papers, they compile evidence and data. You are a joke. Look at the sources.

First one cites a study done by Chicago university researchers.

Seocnd, third, and fourth all reference other external studies. etc. I could go through them all, but that is your job.

http://www.jeramyt.org/gay/gayhealth.html

There's some other statistics, I'd post them but some of them have such a long line of VALID referances that I don't want to waste space.

(kind of like mine)

I've known alot of gay people who do drugs, but even more straight people. This could be because i know more straight people than gay people, all i know is EVERYBODY DOES DRUGS. It's not isolated, and you're stupid for thinking so. There's gay bars, and normal bars, and other types of bars.

I love the personal anecdotes.

Let's rip apart your stupid "Sources":

"43% of a bulimic sample of men were homosexual or bisexual (Carlat et al. 1997), a rate about 15 times higher than the rate in the population in general--meaning homosexual men are probably disproportionately liable to this mental condition."

43%, huh? So does that mean the other 57% of bulimic men were straight? Drrrrrp. Jackass. You're so stupid you don't even know how to read, and apparantly neither do the sources you quote.

Wow, you got me; it is not like homosexuals make up 50% of the population -- JACKASS. 43% of bulimics are homosexuals, and what percent of people are homosexuals? Very few. Not even the 10% figure that is always cited.

Learn something.

"Gay men and lesbians reported more psychological distress than heterosexual women, despite similar levels of social support and quality of physical health," the researchers reported (p. 556)."

Similar levels of social support, eh? Come on, we all know gays and lesbians don't get the same level of social support. For example, gay marriage laws. For example, being made fun of in school and other social situations. Etc. That's funny enough on it's own, but then you add in, "p. 556". Of what? Thanks for the information. You're obviously the copy paste king, same with your other "Sources". In fact, this can't even really be said to be "Your sources" but the sources of whatever source you ripped off.

They are quotes form a book that I got from the website, mate. Youshould learn something about quoting.

And I am the copy-paste king, so you will lose this debate.

When your argument resorts to: "Come on!, come on, we all know gays and lesbians don't get the same level of social support...." and then we trail of into marriage laws and bullying at school.

Gays in my school stuck with their own crowds and were not persecuted, generally they were left alone; I am not sure what their family lives were like. But, a psychologist came to a conclusion and worte such a report.

"63 homosexual men and 14 homosexual women had considered seeking help to change their sexual orientation. Of these, 15 men and 2 women had achieved a change in their sexual orientation."

Geez what a large percentage . Did they try turning straight men gay, too?

It was of a sample, dumbass; of 656 and 43. I hae neve rknown anyone to say "I need help changing my sexual orientation." And so te very idea that such a large amount of people would seek as much is absurd to me. That is nearly 10% of homosexual men asking to be made straight -- sounds like a crisis of identity in many senses, a degree of uncertainty in self.

"because I do not think that large studies have ever been conducted."

Um, actually they did back in the early 1900's when they used EST and other crazy devices to try to turn people straight. Which brings us to you thinking gay people didn't exist before the 90's. Dumbass, here's a link essentially proving that gay people did exist before the 90's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosex...and_psychology
Some quotes towards the end, maybe.

I never said gay people din't exist, 'dumbass.' No large scale studies have been conducted on the percentages of homosexuals who have a desire to change their orientation, etc.

Here's the quote of you not knowing that gay people existed before the 90's: "Look at the dates on a lot of the sources; in the eighties. These people were probably so far in the closet that no one knew of their behavior and thus persecution was not evident, yet still they lead suicidal lifestyles. "

You don't know the nuances of words. Are you 15?

Of course I do know homosexuals existed before the nineties, I noted that they were probably in the closet. "Dumbass."

If you read that page i linked, you'll notice persecution has been going on since studies have begun on it(early 1900's). For example, did you know they did EST(electro static shock therapy) castration, amputation... all kinds of crazy shit. Did you know in some countries they would put you to death? In america you would be imprisoned or incarcerated in a mental institution. In Europe they'd occasionally burn you. Who was it, oscar wilde? Wasn't he exhiled or something from his country for being gay then died shortly after from his over-sensitivity? You just posted an article about how even greece looked down on it. Oh, but wait, persecution wasn't evident.
While you're at it check out, "Reparative therapy".

If you were in the closet, there would not be persecution.

And this is not about the terrible things that have been done to people historically, so lay off.

"But there are a plentiful amount of cases suggesting that it is possible to change your oreitnation sexually and completely, and what we can cnclude from that is up to you. "

Oh really, because i thought you just said, "because I do not think that large studies have ever been conducted." (you know except in the early 1900's) hahahahaha. That's pretty funny. I like how you don't know absolutely anything, maybe you should go find another website to quote, but be careful! All i have to do is type your sources into a search engine and i can find which webpages you copy and pasted from, jackass. Like your other post where like three of the "Sources" were from the same book and you only sourced one of them for some stupid reason, mostly because the one you did source was sourced on the webpage EXACTLY THE SAME WAY.

... .... ... ... ... ...
... ... .... .... .... ....
.. ...... ... ..... ... ......
Did you just realize I was ... copying off of webpages... just now... and did not know... I was providing hyperlinks to each of these webpages or what are you trying to communicate, cunt?
.... ...... ........ .......... .
.... ....... ......... ...... .
....................................

"Their mental health and chemical dependency, regardless of cause, is no good for raising kids."

Hilarious considering you said something like 45% of men and 33% of straight women did drugs:
"as contrasted with 45% and 33% of the straight men and women, respectively."
According to your policy almost half of the population of straight males are, "no good for raising kids" and a third of the population of women. That makes for alot of orphans, eh?

It was not as high of a percentage. "Dumbass."

"Some of the sources were Dutch, I remember reading; so I do know it is global"

Wow two countries makes it global. And yea, there's other countries who hate gays too, and some of them were in europe. DOUBLE TAKE.

What? Hahahahaha.

"No, but they have a higher rate of chemical dependency as per the study above."

Higher percentage rate, right? Because there's probably more straight people, there's probably more straight people doing drugs and beating their children.

"Facts are facts."

Studies and statistics aren't facts, jackass. Don't you know how to think?

Then what are facts?

"I am not a vegan. So I am not concerned with any of that organic bit. "

What the fuck does that matter? There's still chemicals in coca-cola and nearly every type of refined or processed foods. And yes, they do have palpable bodily effects. That's why people drink caffinated drinks.

I just said I was not a vegan in response to some other post... What are.... okay.

"No, they were generally more in the closet minus major metropolises."

Read above study, listen to David bowie or that one lesbian bitch. Gays did in fact exist before then. "Minus the major metropolises" you say. Oh, okay. So because they were in the closet in a place where they were more oppressed(and to this day are still more oppressed because there are lots of stories about people being beaten to death, to this day) it means they didn't exist nor were open. Could that non-openness have anything to do with the oppression? Could the "Fads" that came around after the 70's have anything to do with all the gay movements and the fact that it was removed from the list of mental diseases? Could the even more recent fad of the 90's be because it was recently removed from another list? I don't know. Just speculating.
How old are you? Obviously not very old.

You actually said something that deserves a response:

I am 21.

how old are you?

"No, it is not that, it is merely that I feel this way, and I refuse to be a closet anti-homosexual."

Why are you an anti-homosexual? Give me one good reason.

It's a devious lifestyle that spreads diseases and is repugnant.

"First, it is simply that there is a higher percentage of homosexuals with these issues -- much higher level"

Untrue. Maybe back in the day when they were molesting them with their instruments trying to turn them straight, but not so much anymore. And even if they do, what chances are there it has anything to do with their sexual orientation? Why can't it just be societal constraints or the way they were born? Where do you draw the correlation, and where's your data supporting it.

Continue arguing against fact.

I want to hear more of your personal anecdotes.

All of your data is impartial and biased. it's complete bullshit. You act like gays were never oppressed before, you're so ridiculously stupid. So far everything you've said has been untrue or absolutely retarded in and of itself or even completely contradictory. You accuse others of making a poor argument, but yours was the easiest to pull apart in a long time.

[size=18][/size

Find me some data that contradicts it that is not importail, and not bias, "jackass."