Poll: What do you believe is the cause of homosexuality?
You have already voted in this poll.
Genetic factors.*
13.16%
10 13.16%
Childhood trauma.*
43.42%
33 43.42%
Environmental factors (excl. childhood trauma)*
28.95%
22 28.95%
Other*
14.47%
11 14.47%
Total 76 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Homosexuality and Its Causes
#21

This video is still really funny to me. #edutainment
#22
(04-08-2022, 12:31 AM)doppelbanger Wrote: This reminded me of a phenomenon I've noticed recently, the late acquisition of the gay-lisp. A number of gays I knew from college had no noticeable lisp (frequently no obvious gay mannerisms altogether), despite being openly gay at the time. But in the last couple of years as I've run into them they are significantly more likely to have adopted such obvious signs of gayness. I'm not sure the cause, could be to help identify themselves to other gays, could be a way to indicate to libs that they're in the LBTQ+ identity group, or something else entirely.
I'd actually made a post about this on my old twitter account. It was about some teacher whose students asked about their sexuality, and I made some comment to the effect of "Well, of course they knew he was gay, listen to his voice. The real question is why he does the gay lisp voice when he's only around kids." Unsurprisingly a bunch of fags got incredibly mad over it, but what was surprising was the number of gays who came in to say that what I called the 'gay lisp' (have also heard it to reffered to as a "lilt" but doesn't matter) was actually just their normal speaking voice. Of course, I know from firsthand experience that this is bullshit. Similarly to you, I knew people in highschool who talked in a normal, slightly deep male voice, only to come out as a homosexual and return how speaking with that faggy lisp. These people really tried to argue with me that the high lispy voice isn't something they consciously put on, but is in fact how they speak, entirely naturally. Now, we all know this isn't true; there's no 'high voice gene' that's correlated with being a faggot. I imagine that homosexuals in Elizabethan England, the few that existed, did not speak like the modern day faggot does, nor did they have the highly affected, feminine mannerisms.

But how would you guys explain this belief on their part? I'd hazard to say that whether they're wrong or not, they seemed to be incredibly sincere, at least as one can while they're on twitter calling someone else (me) a bigot. Some people even angrily commented that they had had the gay lisp voice well before they themselves even knew they were gay...which raised some thoughts on my part. Is it possible that these people had subconsciously picked up on gay mannerisms because they'd already been conditioned to be gay, and they just weren't aware of it? While I have met people who only adopt the voice after coming out, as we both mentioned, I'm sure we also knew people growing up whom "everyone knew was gay," well before they came out of the closet. I'm not a believer in "the gay gene," I don't think anyone is born gay. I think it's something that results from conditioning, though the precise way it works is beyond me. It seems entirely possible that people become conditioned towards homosexuality way before they even have a conscious understanding of sexual desire, hence why these people talked like faggots before they knew they were faggots, and thus erroneously come to the conclusion that their 'high voice' is how they really speak.
#23
@Leverkühn
@doppelbanger
i don't think the lisp being a faggot's natural speaking voice is mutually exclusive with him having had a "normal" voice prior to coming out. because there is no 'gay gene' as you rightly say, the state of being a sodomite is entirely psycho-social rather than physical. so in a sense the act of 'coming out' is tantamount to actually becoming a faggot, rather than simply admitting to what one already was. similarly, one's voice is not solely determined by the thickness of the vocal folds and the geometry of the vocal tract, but also by his psychology in how he--consciously or not--chooses to produce sounds. everybody changes their voice in different company; it is natural to speak differently among your friends than you do when delivering a speech, or in the presence of a cute girl. does this make it an insincere affect? thus adopting the fag lisp comes as a natural result of being a faggot, as it is part of what it means to be a faggot in the popular american understanding, akin to how one must first be exposed to some concept of what a tranny is before he can even think about becoming one himself. a corollary to this idea is that perhaps those faggots who used "the lisp" prior to 'coming out' were truly gay all along, and those who adopted it after the fact only became gay after doing so. does this align with anyone's experience?
#24
The gay lisp is probably just picked up by effete, impressionable kids from television or more likely YouTube. I imagine the process is probably similar to how White kids start talking like hood negroes via listening to rap.
#25
What you described is HSTS. Gays are HSTS not AGP. You haven't read a damn thing from Blanchard, so stop using his term to describe anything.
#26
(05-27-2022, 12:45 AM)Guest Wrote: What you described is HSTS. Gays are HSTS not AGP. You haven't read a damn thing from Blanchard, so stop using his term to describe anything.

[Image: 10294%20-%20bloodshot_eyes%20crying%20dj..._teeth.jpg]
#27
(05-09-2022, 11:55 PM)chungus Wrote: I think what's fascinating is that the MTF tranny look roughly 10 years older after transitioning, while the FTM tranny looks roughly 10 years younger after transitioning.

Estrogen is a stress hormone, starvation state causes gynecomastia to develop.

Rape Eat vindicated once again.
#28
So I can starve my gf to make her tits bigger and her waist smaller at the same time? I fucking love science and Rape Eat!
#29
(05-29-2022, 05:03 PM)BillyONare Wrote: So I can starve my gf to make her tits bigger and her waist smaller at the same time? I fucking love science and Rape Eat!
no but you can get her to look like an obese goblin with a blown-out midsection and cellulite thighs
#30
That is what high estrogen does?
#31
boobemaxxing is a delicate game... Not sure what estrogen is supposed to do, exactly, except to trigger some sort of inflammatory reaction. Perhaps this allows tissue transformations. Gonna have to ask around for that one
#32
Why is there such a high number of black homos and trannies?
#33
There is much less sexual dimorphism in non-white races. Non-Nilotic blacks are also inherently feminine and cowardly people.
#34
There are 3 reasons for sodomy:

Firstly, Brain Damage.
A damaged amygdala causes people to lose their understanding of boundaries and makes them insane perverts.
Pederasts are shown to have issues with their amygdala

Secondly, Being Sodomized
Particularly as a child. Half of all sodomites were sodomized as children.
Which they then later see as a positive experience and wish to replicate on other children.

Thirdly, Grooming
This is the growing method in which they turn youth towards sodomy today.
By propaganda and exposure to sodomy through pornography to children, they twist their understanding of healthy sexuality.
This is then later compounded heavily if they are then encouraged and commit sodomic acts.

Lastly, a factor worth considering, which is genetic, is Neuroticism.
Neuroticism is mainly genetic, but by itself doesn't cause one to become a sodomite, it just predisposes them to it through various means.

These are the only reasons for sodomy.
I could elaborate with "studies" and "sources", but I won't.
It is easy to find the material, and it is logically sound.
There is no genetic reason for sodomy.
#35
Ideally, this post would be its own thread, but alas as a guest I cannot make a thread (possibly a wise move on the part of forum management), and I am reluctant to make an account (I would argue a wise move on my part, because the forum is a little edgy for normalfags, and I know the last one was shut down).



A Theory of Sexuality

I am not sure where I came to these beliefs.
This paradigm seems separate from mainstream beliefs and theories of sexuality.
I believe some of it comes from the pickup artist "Mystery" and his book on "The Venusian Arts" (I cannot recall the title, but it should be easy to search for).
Some of this comes from my understanding of psychology theory.
Some of this comes from my philosophical and occult readings and experimentation.

The primary motivation for sexuality of all kinds is fertility: to pass on one's genes and produce healthy children.
Sexual arousal results primarily from stimulation of the genitals; although millions of years of evolution have programmed arousal to trigger due to secondary factors. The main secondary factors which trigger arousal are observed indicators of fertility: signs of youth, health, strength, intelligence, and so on.

Now here's the rub (pun intended): your dick is omnisexual.
A dick will rise to anything that stimulates it, provided its bearer is full of testosterone.
This includes random physical and "indicators of fertility" stimulus, not necessarily sexual (your underwear feels good on your balls, a cold shower makes you feel charged up, the paredoila phenomenon causes you to see a pair of sexy legs in the curves of a tree, you hugged a woman after an extended period of nofap, you hugged a man after an extended period of nofap, you watched too many Coca-Cola ads and
now you associate a Diet Coke with a state of horniness, etc. etc. etc.)

A person has some ability to choose what stimulus to respond to, to choose what of the random stimulus thrown at him that makes him horny to focus on, but a person ultimately cannot control what random stimulus they will encounter. Also genetic inheritance is a factor: people do inherit sexual tastes from their parents, for better or worse.

HOWEVER

Even people with the most fucked up fetishes, as far as possible from vanilla reproduction, are trying to reproduce.
This even includes fetishes which nullify a person's reproductive capability. In the case of transexuality, my belief is that a transexual subject is trying to transform into an example of the kind of child they wish they could have: they are trying to embody something that they believe should be passed on, a personal ideal, in some sense as an example for the other more successfully reproductive members of the species.
They want to show us something that they want future generations to embody.

I believe that a transexual person could be led back towards a more normal expression of sexuality if they could be prompted to identify what it is that they want to pass on, the quality that they are trying to embody by "transfomring themselves", and gently reminded of the success of regular vanilla heterosexuality in the project of fertile creation.
On the other hand, transexuality *is* a self correcting problem, so maybe transexuals should be left alone to perform their auto-eugenics.
But I suppose my point is that there may be something of psychological value in transexual aesthetics that is worth passing on.
Maybe that's giving "transgender people" way too much credit, but there is some kind of ... for lack of better words ... lighthearted, vapid, unserious quality, completely uncynical and childish faith in the righteousness of the cause to the transgender movement: as if it's some sort of stress response to the grim overseriousness modernity. If there is something worthwhile in the transgender movement, I believe it's somehow related to this childish unseriousness.

Now, on to homosexuality:
I believe it's relatively common for people to be sexually aroused at the sight of apparently fertile men: whether it's twinks, hunky hot guys, beefy bears, Aniki, etc. etc. etc. (I am half joking here, but I am also half serious).
My understanding of sexual arousal is that your balls flood your body with testosterone to prep you for reproduction.
Say you come across a 17 year old swimmer, his lithe muscular body glistening and wet, his skin tanned, his hair bleached from the sun, his speedo both masking and revealing the shape of his glory ... Not only is he stunning, godly even in his beauty and athleticism, his girlfriend runs up to him in a white miniskirt and a crop top, her un-bra'd knockers generously bouncing as she skips up next to him, her blond hair swishing: she kisses him on the cheek, and looks at him like a mischevious child with a secret. He laughs and wraps his arm around her and they walk off together into the sunset.
Now let's say, hypothetically (because we all know you're 100% straight ... this is only hypothetically): let's say you started to erect while watching them. "How dirty," you think to yourself, "surely I'm not gay, I've liked girls all my life. Besides, the girl had great tits! No, the shining fertility, extruding in the lad's tight swim briefs, ... no that did absolutely nothing for me! I'm not gay! I swear I am NOT!!"
Well, fear not, you're probably not gay (and in fact, homosexuality might not be as much of a problem as people think, but more on that later): my hypothesis is that, if one feels oneself becoming horny in the presence or at the sight of attractive, virile, healthy males, it is because your body is flooding you with testosterone so that you may COMPETE with them, for access to prime females.
Have you heard the theory that the penis head is evolved to be able to scoop out other male's semen?
A healthy, virile, beautiful, intelligent, successful, hot man is a direct threat to one's access to women in the area (in a very primal "caveman theory" sense), so your body is spurring you into a hyped up, testosterone charged state so you can (or could in a non-civilized setting) fight the better male and steal his bitch away. In civilized society we have games, physical games like sports, mental games like chess, and so on, in which males compete for female attention. Videogames are another issue, with another utility: but that's for another discussion.

With this in mind, that if homoerotic stimuli arouses a person, it may be one's body priming itself for competition for female mates, then homoeroticism can serve an obvious purpose. I think everybody knows this, but all male friend groups, especially other athletes, can be a little horny when they're together, ultimately pairing off with females. Cultivating homoeroticism in a group can spur the members in a group into
competitiveness, resulting in the honing of the body and the mind of a man, so that he becomes fiercely dominant and fiercely attractive to women. Keep in mind that "homoeroticism" is different from "homosexuality", but also remember the shocking battlefield success of homosexual warrior pairs in ancient cultures like Sparta, or the homosexuality observed among Germanic raider tribes in the days of Rome.
Also see the sculpture works of German artist Arno Breker for Nazi Germany: depicting stoic, healthy, intimidatingly hot men. I'd put forward that the homoeroticism inherent in the idea of the "superman" the "ubermensch" the "aryan male" the "hero" is a timeless appeal, not just of German National Socialism, but also of ancient Greece and Rome, European pagan tribes, ancient Egypt, Feudal Japan, and so on, and cultures in which this archetype is ignored or denigrated do so at their own peril.

I hate abrahamic religions, but there is that line "As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another" in Proverbs, which is true.
A lot of abrahamic texts are actually collated from the great works of the nations which hosted jews, stolen wisdom, essentially,
but that is for another time.






Anyway, just some things to think about. I tried to structure this post in a way that it could inspire a lot of discussion. I held back some ideas: I think the most important one I am biting my tongue on is my theory of morality, which informs my views on sexuality and how it should be practiced.
For consideration, there is a Buddhist tenant that one should "practice right sexuality", which essentially boils down to doing no harm and respecting the wills of the participants, but that's another conversation too.
Not the full extent of my beliefs, either.
#36
(01-07-2023, 05:27 AM)Temporary Guest you can call me Zeth Wrote: Ideally, this post would be its own thread, but alas as a guest I cannot make a thread (possibly a wise move on the part of forum management), and I am reluctant to make an account (I would argue a wise move on my part, because the forum is a little edgy for normalfags, and I know the last one was shut down).



A Theory of Sexuality

I am not sure where I came to these beliefs.
This paradigm seems separate from mainstream beliefs and theories of sexuality.
I believe some of it comes from the pickup artist "Mystery" and his book on "The Venusian Arts" (I cannot recall the title, but it should be easy to search for).
Some of this comes from my understanding of psychology theory.
Some of this comes from my philosophical and occult readings and experimentation.

The primary motivation for sexuality of all kinds is fertility: to pass on one's genes and produce healthy children.
Sexual arousal results primarily from stimulation of the genitals; although millions of years of evolution have programmed arousal to trigger due to secondary factors. The main secondary factors which trigger arousal are observed indicators of fertility: signs of youth, health, strength, intelligence, and so on.

Now here's the rub (pun intended): your dick is omnisexual.
A dick will rise to anything that stimulates it, provided its bearer is full of testosterone.
This includes random physical and "indicators of fertility" stimulus, not necessarily sexual (your underwear feels good on your balls, a cold shower makes you feel charged up, the paredoila phenomenon causes you to see a pair of sexy legs in the curves of a tree, you hugged a woman after an extended period of nofap, you hugged a man after an extended period of nofap, you watched too many Coca-Cola ads and
now you associate a Diet Coke with a state of horniness, etc. etc. etc.)

A person has some ability to choose what stimulus to respond to, to choose what of the random stimulus thrown at him that makes him horny to focus on, but a person ultimately cannot control what random stimulus they will encounter. Also genetic inheritance is a factor: people do inherit sexual tastes from their parents, for better or worse.

HOWEVER

Even people with the most fucked up fetishes, as far as possible from vanilla reproduction, are trying to reproduce.
This even includes fetishes which nullify a person's reproductive capability. In the case of transexuality, my belief is that a transexual subject is trying to transform into an example of the kind of child they wish they could have: they are trying to embody something that they believe should be passed on, a personal ideal, in some sense as an example for the other more successfully reproductive members of the species.
They want to show us something that they want future generations to embody.

I believe that a transexual person could be led back towards a more normal expression of sexuality if they could be prompted to identify what it is that they want to pass on, the quality that they are trying to embody by "transfomring themselves", and gently reminded of the success of regular vanilla heterosexuality in the project of fertile creation.
On the other hand, transexuality *is* a self correcting problem, so maybe transexuals should be left alone to perform their auto-eugenics.
But I suppose my point is that there may be something of psychological value in transexual aesthetics that is worth passing on.
Maybe that's giving "transgender people" way too much credit, but there is some kind of ... for lack of better words ... lighthearted, vapid, unserious quality, completely uncynical and childish faith in the righteousness of the cause to the transgender movement: as if it's some sort of stress response to the grim overseriousness modernity. If there is something worthwhile in the transgender movement, I believe it's somehow related to this childish unseriousness.

Now, on to homosexuality:
I believe it's relatively common for people to be sexually aroused at the sight of apparently fertile men: whether it's twinks, hunky hot guys, beefy bears, Aniki, etc. etc. etc. (I am half joking here, but I am also half serious).
My understanding of sexual arousal is that your balls flood your body with testosterone to prep you for reproduction.
Say you come across a 17 year old swimmer, his lithe muscular body glistening and wet, his skin tanned, his hair bleached from the sun, his speedo both masking and revealing the shape of his glory ... Not only is he stunning, godly even in his beauty and athleticism, his girlfriend runs up to him in a white miniskirt and a crop top, her un-bra'd knockers generously bouncing as she skips up next to him, her blond hair swishing: she kisses him on the cheek, and looks at him like a mischevious child with a secret. He laughs and wraps his arm around her and they walk off together into the sunset.
Now let's say, hypothetically (because we all know you're 100% straight ... this is only hypothetically): let's say you started to erect while watching them. "How dirty," you think to yourself, "surely I'm not gay, I've liked girls all my life. Besides, the girl had great tits! No, the shining fertility, extruding in the lad's tight swim briefs, ... no that did absolutely nothing for me! I'm not gay! I swear I am NOT!!"
Well, fear not, you're probably not gay (and in fact, homosexuality might not be as much of a problem as people think, but more on that later): my hypothesis is that, if one feels oneself becoming horny in the presence or at the sight of attractive, virile, healthy males, it is because your body is flooding you with testosterone so that you may COMPETE with them, for access to prime females.
Have you heard the theory that the penis head is evolved to be able to scoop out other male's semen?
A healthy, virile, beautiful, intelligent, successful, hot man is a direct threat to one's access to women in the area (in a very primal "caveman theory" sense), so your body is spurring you into a hyped up, testosterone charged state so you can (or could in a non-civilized setting) fight the better male and steal his bitch away. In civilized society we have games, physical games like sports, mental games like chess, and so on, in which males compete for female attention. Videogames are another issue, with another utility: but that's for another discussion.

With this in mind, that if homoerotic stimuli arouses a person, it may be one's body priming itself for competition for female mates, then homoeroticism can serve an obvious purpose. I think everybody knows this, but all male friend groups, especially other athletes, can be a little horny when they're together, ultimately pairing off with females. Cultivating homoeroticism in a group can spur the members in a group into
competitiveness, resulting in the honing of the body and the mind of a man, so that he becomes fiercely dominant and fiercely attractive to women. Keep in mind that "homoeroticism" is different from "homosexuality", but also remember the shocking battlefield success of homosexual warrior pairs in ancient cultures like Sparta, or the homosexuality observed among Germanic raider tribes in the days of Rome.
Also see the sculpture works of German artist Arno Breker for Nazi Germany: depicting stoic, healthy, intimidatingly hot men. I'd put forward that the homoeroticism inherent in the idea of the "superman" the "ubermensch" the "aryan male" the "hero" is a timeless appeal, not just of German National Socialism, but also of ancient Greece and Rome, European pagan tribes, ancient Egypt, Feudal Japan, and so on, and cultures in which this archetype is ignored or denigrated do so at their own peril.

I hate abrahamic religions, but there is that line "As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another" in Proverbs, which is true.
A lot of abrahamic texts are actually collated from the great works of the nations which hosted jews, stolen wisdom, essentially,
but that is for another time.






Anyway, just some things to think about. I tried to structure this post in a way that it could inspire a lot of discussion. I held back some ideas: I think the most important one I am biting my tongue on is my theory of morality, which informs my views on sexuality and how it should be practiced.
For consideration, there is a Buddhist tenant that one should "practice right sexuality", which essentially boils down to doing no harm and respecting the wills of the participants, but that's another conversation too.
Not the full extent of my beliefs, either.

Zeth, thank you for your thoughtful post. However, I question the need for sexual arousal to awaken competitiveness in men. It seems to me that all you need is something like the feeling of "hurt pride," or of the kind of anger that precedes a fight. Imagine the same situation you described, but instead of a HandsomeThursday it's a disgusting greasy overweight fat fuck, and instead of his girlfriend it's a random girl who you already had eyes on. Would there be arousal in that case?

Your post reminds me of that essay from Citizen of Geneva on Asylum Vol 1 issue 4. I think we can all agree that making "homosexuality" an identity is retarded, as is the idea that sodomy is the logical progression of being aroused by another male. The one thing I cannot wrap my head around is the Weininger argument that all male friendship requires an element of sexuality. Have the people who advanced this notion never had friends? The idea of doing anything sexual with my close friends repulses me profoundly--maybe as much as doing something sexual with my family members.



[-]
Quick Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)