Conservatives are freaking out because they learned that some animals are gay
https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/05/new-queer-animals-documentary-freaks-out-far-right-wingers/Open linkView original on lemmy.world681
Comments179https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/05/new-queer-animals-documentary-freaks-out-far-right-wingers/Open linkView original on lemmy.world
I think conservatives freak out any time they learn basically anything.
Bold of you to assume they learn. They just knee-jerk get angry at whatever fox "news" tells them they should be angry about.
It's pretty common where I live, especially for people who grow up in conservative families. You start out assuming the trusted adults in your life are right about everything (or at least I did), but once you're exposed to the world outside your bubble, you gradually (or not) change your mind on a lot of things.
I get that that's different from, say, an adult with fully formed beliefs one day changing their mind, and that probably is pretty rare. Still, out of all the badass lefties I know, most of them did have at least a few years of cringy hardcore conservatism. 🤷
Or alternatively, pretend it didn’t happen
A true servative learns everything they will need to know for the duration of their life by the age of 13.
They die basically the same kinds of people they were born as.
And by conservatives you mean two random twitter accounts that, at least in the article screens, do not mention their political view at all, one random youtube commenter with no mention of political views, and one conservative sports website which is kind of a weird crossover.
Let’s keep it real here, that article is trying suuuuper hard to be edgy with nothing much to cling to. Conservatives stopped talking about gay people in the 90’s.
The fuck are you smoking? Thomas talked about overturning Obergefell in his Roe ruling. Fuck off.
Sorry dude. I read the article and see the only cites of conservatives losing it are a couple social media comments from random noname people with no clear political view.
I don’t follow foreign politics so I have no clue what you’re trying to say, but in my country the older thinkers give zero fucks about people being gay.
Either way, do you think this article sincerely found conservatives freaking out about gay animals because I do not see that in this article. It does the world no favours manifesting polarization without substance.
Thomas is a Supreme Court justice and his legal ruling in a recent case advocated for banning gay marriage. Perhaps the situation is different elsewhere but in the US there is still a lot of prejudice against queer people among conservatives.
That nuts, thanks for the context.
According to Wikipedia the overwhelming majority of Americans support gay marriage. It actually references the 90’s as the turning point which seems to support my original comment.
wiki
You: I don't understand American politics around queer people but I'm gonna tell you that you have nothing to worry about. Fucking idiot.
What the overwhelming majority of Americans believe doesn't matter, because the US is not a direct democracy; it is a representative republic. The representatives are elected, and are massively corrupt. The corruption comes in many different forms, like gerrymandering, first past the post voting leading to a two party system, private monetary donations to political campaigns leading to representatives doing their donors' bidding, revolving door politics, the owner class having ownership over the means of production leading to massive consolidation of wealth which then ties back into private money in politics and the revolving door, etc.
When looking at polling data, the American people are pretty solidly social democrats, but US policy does not reflect that at all; instead, it reflects the will of the corporations and wealthy donors, except for very rare situations where there is a form of direct democracy, like direct ballot initiatives, for example. When looking at bills that are signed into law outside of direct ballot initiatives, 99.99% of the time, it reflects the interests of the wealthy or fascists (since the wealthy prefers fascism over any semblence of socialism, since it keeps them in power).
Yeah I think it is more of a loud minority but it is a strongly held belief for a not insignificant portion of the population, and they hold a lot of political power.
They literally send gay children to abusive camps to “pray the gay away”. You cannot say they don’t give a shit about gay people, they’re just harder to attack so they’re focusing on trans people now.
The majority of Americans arent conservative, so what the majority believe doesnt reflect what a minority of the population believe. As for the population of conservatives its about thirty percent, they just have undue influence due to fuckery and outdated governmental systems.
Should have stopped there.
Yeah, if only you would. But you won't.
It's simpler just to block people like you.
"The Dangerous Consequences of Florida's "Don't Say Gay" Bill on LGBTQ+ Youth in Florida" - Yup, not a word since the 90s. https://www.law.georgetown.edu/gender-journal/online/volume-xxiii-online/the-dangerous-consequences-of-floridas-dont-say-gay-bill-on-lgbtq-youth-in-florida/
You had me until the last sentence.
You may now be my favorite parody account on Lemmy.
I guess prepare to be let down?
I don't think you could let me down if you tried, friend.
Peruse my comments. Huge let down. But thanks for your support.
I’m not talking specifically about this issue or what was said in this article.
What issue or what article?
It was a general statement. Not sure why that's difficult to discern.
Are we seriously doomed to have this stupid ass homophobia shoved down our throats by conservative bigots every 5-10 years because they keep getting mad about the same thing all over again? I've been listening to this shit for over 20 years now.
Just know that these asshats take extreme pride in their hate. They will subject people to it until the day they die. Christianity is an eternal well of hate and ignorance. And they want to make sure no one is ever happy, the miserable fucks!
I think we’re doomed to have it shoved down our throats way more frequently than that with their recent freak outs.
Also, he mentions 20 years, I have seen it going on much longer than 20 years, sadly. If they seize power via a Ronald McDonald presidency, they will make things far, far worse. I remember things being very hostile toward gays (trans, etc., didn't really get a mention other than for comedy) at the height of the fear over AIDS. I think the boot lifted a bit from their neck during the 70s, a whole lot of people seemed to view the 80s as their comeuppance for daring to be who they are...
And anyone that votes for Republicans, and yet is not a fully white, xtian, far-right cishet male is absolutely kidding themselves. They'll have you up against the wall eventually no matter how much Ronald McDonald regalia you might have purchased.
There's literally worms in their brains.
Given their history, I'm thinking yes. And they have more plans than just poutrages on their alternative reality cinematic universe, they want to force their worldview of xtian Sharia Law on everyone.
"They're turning the freaking frogs gay!"
Kind of amazing I didn’t think of that when I read this
I couldn't help but think it, he lives rent free in my head.
for a positive counterbalance, the “swans can be gay” meme
Honestly, I'm a wonk, listening to an episode of KF right now, and that quote is so foreign to me because there's so many other clips I've heard more often. Does that make me a hipster if "freaking frogs gay" is too mainstream?
Yes, but the good kind. The knowledgeable kind.
I’m deeply sad that Alex jones got his hands on that one. There’s a potentially huge effect that birth control has on fish reproduction, but I suspect people dismiss it because Jones said libs were turning frogs gay
Shit headline: conservatives don't learn anything ever
Yeah, the found out some animals can be gay, but they didn't learn anything from that.
I've watched decades of leftist get their heads kicked in by conservative police forces who have learned how to better kick in heads. Mean while leftists are showing up with a playbook that hasn't been updated in 70 years. If anything the 70s probably had more effective playbook. Point is its fun to say but the left is not making a great case for learning and adapting.
Hell in Canada they have pretty much fucked us for a few decades pretty severely
We've been fed a story about non violent protest leading to change. They told us any non violence but intentionally left out the most important part about those protests. Those marches were to places where all those people were going to get in line to register to vote. They were out to achieve something and gum up the system. They were forcing their oppressors to contend with them.
Just showing up with signs and saying you think something is wrong is never going to do anything. They know we don't like it, they don't care.
You have to go inside, make a demand, and be followed by a thousand people who also make a demand. Prevent them from doing business until they deal with you. They will respond with violence. That is the point.
You go with a specific list of demands, you go in to the place you want to meet those demands, and you don't leave until you're forced to. You keep doing that until it becomes a national problem.
You cannot effectively protest non violently without disrupting business in concrete in measurable ways. You might as well just shout at a wall.
I agree for the most part except I disagree that the solution is violent in anyway.
View Society fundamentally as in group and then a million out groups. Its pop culture vs sub groups. The right wing represent popular culture in almost every country they are traditionalist. They are where every other group wants to be. They are blue jean letter jacket pop culture.
The left wing are always the rejects, both by choice and not by choice. They are various groups of skids and punks and poor and jobless and immigrants. Unified under this idea that they deserve the attention and same rules applied to the pop group.
Protests is a way the sub groups fight to gain equality with the pop group. Little by little it can succeed with violence but I don't believe that's effective. I think it does the opposite. I think a lot of these protests serve the people that are being protested more. That's because a lot of modern protestors seem to have gone with this view that becoming a burden to everyone is the way to get movement?
Environmental activist deflate tires and stand in traffic. During morning commutes for example. If you look at life as groups all vying for popularity, these actions are unpopular and alienate these groups and their associated causes. Being violent also accomplishes this. Violence can get a lot done. Doesn't mean its the most effective. I just cannot believe modern day protestors have never decided to make their cause appealing in a way to make their cause something that people would want to join. Why is it always being obnoxious and shouting and violent or a nuisance. I have a suspicion that large entities figured out long ago you can beat these protestors and kill their momentum by actually encouraging them. Not just encouraging them but finding the most radical and unappealing ones in the group and funding them so they become leaders.
Who? The left fucked you? The right? You need an editor.
Imagine having a world view based on such fragile bullshit that two animals fucking can shatter it...
Yeah conservatives are brain damaged.
Just see how many of them react to teaching the fundamentals of biology (evolution).
Being a conservative requires refusing to learn anything
In high school, the conservative kids refused to accept homosexuality occurred in Greek culture. Then when they finally did accept it, said it was why God destroyed their civilization?
"Destroyed" by the famously straight Romans?
How do you think the Romans caught all that gayness?
Greek blood
Being Greco-Roman means never having to apologize for getting off.
By that claim... Roman Empire go bye bye?
You conserve your brain by not learning about stuff and things.
5D Go Fish right there.
Learned? No, that is the wrong word.
They are in violent and vehement denial about facts that are empirically documented and readily observable with ones own eyes.
They didn't actually learn anything. It will be written off as some "degenerate liberuhl conspiracy", as they do with every other fact that doesn't align with their perverse totalitarian worldview.
I mean, that's the entire conservative/right-wing M.O.
"If animals can be gay, I could be gay, but I am not gay! 😱" - Republican caught sucking dick in an alley
This is logic.
That made me snort :D
Ironically, you can enjoy sucking dick without being gay. Because sexuality is a spectrum.
If the Republicans would stop being so defensive, they might find a lot to like about the sexuality spectrum.
Pretty much. The intersection of gender and sexuality spectrum means romantic attraction, sexual attraction, and sexual interests can mix and match in a lot of ways.
Uuuuuhhhhhhh none of those words sounds like "male and female he created them" buddy, straight to Hell with ye
yes but that doesn't help reinforce right-wingers' feelings of superiority
That's not snot!!!!
Meh, I deleted this, it was just going to get misinterpreted by literalists.
Pfffft. What a hypocrite. Whining about trans people's immense victimhood, while using the exact same metaphor to imply that, in fact, HE is the most victimized of all by not even being allowed to be the victim. By being "buried beneath the pyramid" of victimhood. Bahahahaha. The cognitive dissonance is incredible.
And buddy... That "Christian" part is apparently doing a lot of heavy lifting on your victim complex, my guy. Plenty of us straight white men get by without being under constant attack. If everyone around you seems like an asshole, maybe you're the asshole. And maybe if you acted a little more Christ-like, you'd give people less reason to attack you and you'd make more friends with different kinds of people.
The problem in his view, as best I can tell, is that there is a natural hierarchy, that he belongs on top of telling everyone else what to do, and any upset of this natural hierarchy is oppressing him. He may not have thought this out in so many words, but it's a hypothesis that seems to make accurate predictions about what people in his reference class will do and say.
Oh, definitely. Conservatives are all about social hierarchies and how it’s the only ‘natural’ form of society. Anyone trying to ‘rise above their place’ or help someone do so is an enemy to be destroyed, lest they cause the collapse of society as we know it.
And neveryoumind if society as we know it is a mighty pile of suck for people not at the top. Shoulda been born rich white christian cishet males.
honestly from the way he talks I can't tell if hes a top or a bottom and which he actually prefers.
billionaires lives are made near unliveable by the evil tax system that exploits all their hard work to benefit the lazy
/s
Like a Pharaoh? Buried with concubines and unimaginable riches and feasts in an elaborate sarcophagus? Under a monument built on the backs of thousands of slaves and their suffering and death? Yeah, okay, that tracks.
Except that the pyramid builders weren't slaves
Peacock: "Actually you do, here are some gay animals"
Fucking hilarious.
Imagine if animals had a sense of ethics lmao
Well they certainly have compassion, cooperation, a sense of fairness, social norms, etc. Whether that makes ethics is a matter of semantics, I think.
well if we're going by the traditionally defined ethics as we humans use it. No, because they don't speak english.
Do they have some form of ethical system? Probably, i believe we've even seen as much in some species already.
Lots of people in the world who don't speak English.
correct me if im wrong here, but do any animals, ever, at all, speak any human language at all?
I just used english as a force of habit. A stand in statement if you will.
Perhaps maybe even the fact that we're speaking in fucking english right now, will lead you to the reason as to why i stated english.
Of course people don't fucking speak english, what a stupid fucking comment.
Varmaa siksi koska mä veikkaan et puhu mitään muuta kieltä, joten jos mä rupeen kirjottaa jollai muul kielel, ni sun pitää vaivautua itse kääntämään se (mikä ei tosin nykyään vaadi kun sen kaks klikkaust, sillonku mnää olin piän ni sullei ois ollu mitää tsänssiä).
Monolinguistic people rarely realise just how overtly ethnocentric they're being. Guess it's hard to see when you don't have any other languages to think in.
How hard would it have been to just refrain from the word English in that sentence? Why did you feel the need to add it? Does "animals don't speak" somehow not convey the meaning of that? (Genuine questions, not sarcasm.)
If you think that's stupid, wait until you hear about the guy who said the same thing of animals.
There are lots of parrots who can clearly utter recognisable English, so yes, there are animals who speak English. On what level can they understand the language they use, that's another question entirely. Which more or less was my point in replying to you. :)
Anyway, for those actually interested in what the current research says about how much animals can use language, NativLang on YT has an awesome series on animal speech/grammar that goes into depth on the subject. Here's the first video.
You're repeating the age-old myth of "parrots just parrot, they don't actually understand anything they parrot".
This is decidedly untrue, and there's heaps of science behind that. A lot of which I have shown you. So that assertion is proved untrue, ie "wrong".
This is also just plain wrong. It's a Greek word that comes to English from Latin. So not an English word, actually. (See my first point about monolinguistic speakers often being a bit ethnocentric. Not your fault, one language is limiting in more ways than one.)
Parrots can indeed speak, but to what extent do they actually understand the language, or have grammar? That's the video I linked in my very first reply.
This:
Can animals grammar? – introduction to my animated series which goes deep in just what the capabilities are, because there is a lot of debate in the science world.
Thoguht you might be interested, but guess you're more interested in "winning" a conversation than actually having one.
and it also probably helps when you're classifying humans separately to animals for the purpose of a semantical argument, where classifying humans as animals would only cause further problems.
Along with the fact that it's arguably hate speech to some degree to refer to certain groups of people as animals separately from others, but this isn't relevant.
are you actually genuinely mad at me for this? And yes, "animals don't speak" doesn't convey it properly, because animals literally do speak, they just don't speak the same kind of interpreted languages that humans often do, though we have taught monke sign language a couple of times, so there's that, which might count i guess. (though it's not particularly fluent, or communicative)
But generally, for all intents and purposes, for this semantic argument, no, they don't speak spoken languages, with semantic meanings, and rooted histories. The same way that humans do "english" for example.
This is like being mad at someone for talking about transportation, and using cars as an example, because they like cars, or drive one all the time. It's just the basic bias of existing as a human being, where being impartial to literally everything that ever exists, at any point in time, is quite literally impossible.
yes technically parrots can recognize, and recreate sounds, it's not that they understand english, or words, or language. It's that they're capable of recreating vocal anomalies of human speech, pretty well. Likewise, i can also mimic someone else speaking in another language, or just individual words, but that doesn't mean that i'm speaking the language. In order for me to speak that language, i need to be able to communicate in some commonly understood and defined dialect, that other people can understand, such that i'm capable of understanding them as well. Parrots cannot do this.
regardless, my point was that animals have their own code of ethics, independent from the human concept of ethics, as defined in languages like english, which i used as the example, because i don't know if you know, ethics, is an english word. It comes from the english language. I'm just using the system relevant to the words i'm speaking about. It'd be a little weird if i was using fucking C the programming language, as an example of language, wouldn't it?
Conservatives tomorrow: not eating your young is unnatural! Anyone who doesn't eat at least one baby must be punished!
Getting "The Purge" vibes from your comment...
I love that you specifically sad Peacock. It reminds me both of the rainbow-colored peacock logo of NBC in the 90s, as well as their PSA bumper "The more you know".
Well the second argument is true, it's just that being gay isn't unethical. But talk to them about veganism and all of a sudden we can eat insane amounts of dead animals cause lions eat other animals too?
Let's now wait until they learn about shrimps and hermaphroditism in animals.
I saw a post the other day half-joking that they were making the next Jurassic Park movie woke by having trans dinosaurs.
Pretty sure somebody wasn't paying attention during the original...
But it’s because of the gay frogs!
And if they hear this information, they may stare blankly, refuse to take in the new information, then respond with a thought-terminating cliche like "God only made two genders."
Actually like this: https://youtu.be/dF98ii6r_gU?si=auFnMHOAwPi3UWlz
Oh, this sh*tfest is hilarious.
We’ve known about gay penguins since 1912, and regressives are just now cottoning on?
The conservative education system makes a special effort to misinform/occlude information about certain natural facts of life for generations of people. So every graduation cycle or two, you've got a fresh faced cohort of brainwashed kids who have to find out about the gay penguins from 1912 for the first time, ten years after they've cemented their bias against homosexuality on "rationalist" grounds.
We've been playing similar games with evolution since the fucking Stokes Monkey Trial. Identical debunked arguments showed up in The Panda's Thumb over a century after they were ostensibly put to bed.
You'll periodically see this show up in regards to phrenology and eugenics, as well. All sorts of inane long-dismissed claims about how physiognomy clues amateur race-sleuths in to someone's criminal intent or intellectual fitness or breeding capacity.
Recycling pseudoscience and vaguely sourced gossip is also very popular in anti-abortion circles, giving us all sorts of zombie lies about pagan blood sacrifice of fetuses and elaborate plots to cull the white race.
The dogmatism of western bigotry is baked into conservative ideology. You can find people dredging up the same old tired lies from the 19th century in arguments made before the US Congress and the Supreme Court to this very day.
I remember Manny Pacquiao saying homosexuals are worst than animals because homosexuality does not exist in the animal kingdom. He was promptly educated.
Clearly not well enough. This is the old liberal-adjacent "Hate the sin, love the sinner" canard that moderate fundamentalists trot out, in order to exist in that gray "agree to disagree" space liberals love. Give it too much room to breath, and you're going to be escorted to the Gay Conversion Therapy Camps with big rainbow colored "ordnen macht frei" signs over the entrance gate.
Doesn’t this happen every few years?
Its against nature
No, not that nature
Man I had a cat who would only try to bang my female dog, hated my other cat and dog, just specifically had eyes for that one dog.
LOL, they are really just now learning this?
These are probably some of the same geniuses that believe that repeating that evolution is "just" a theory is making some kind of point.
Did you ever find out what was up with those barnacles?
Haven't seen the documentary but would be great to have an annotated list of accounts of gay animals from throughout history to point people towards so they can't say its chemicals in the water or microplastics turning animals gay in the current era.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals
Like, all of them. But for specific examples:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior
It doesn't mention any historical examples from before 1990 due to cultural prejudice but I'd be shocked if the Greeks and Romans didn't write on the subject, being such avid observers of the natural world. Sounds like a fun research project for a historian, I'm sure it's out there.
Tbf I wouldn't mind them thinking microplastics turned animals gay, maybe they'd be inclined to do something about it
Alex Jones' well known statement that "they're putting chemicals in the water that turn the fricking frogs gay" isn't enough for them to support even the most basic environmental regulation.
A nice thought that there are inroads on the environment among the paranoid set of conservatives, maybe worth exploring. I recall studies showing some kinds of chemical effluent having gender based effects on fish at least, which might be the origin of Alex's bizarre theory.
How dare the animals engage in such unnatural behavior!!! /s
Easy. They need Jesus.
Holy shit... Conversion Therapy for pets.
Did we just stumble on a billion dollar grift that will only harm particularly awful people?
yeah it'd also harm the pets, you fool. Set that idea in the dustbin, where it belongs.
Well, we're not actually going to do anything besides hang out with other people's pets then tell the owners they are "cured."
aah, clever.
The really awesome pets are "more difficult to cure" so we are going to need them to stay longer.
^ this person gets it
I have no doubt that some crazed conservative is out there shock-collaring their dogs or worse for "homosexual behaviour." They're absolutely deranged.
They already knew about the frogs years ago.
The trailer for the series is full of comments criticizing Peacock (the publisher) for releasing this documentary and saying they'll delete their Peacock accounts.
I've never heard of them before and I might open an account specifically to watch this! It looks genuinely good from the trailer
If you didn't know Peacock is the same as NBC. It's their online streaming service.
They're just learning it now? Lol, talk about being late to the party. That research has been around for decades.
I guess they weren't fans of Parks and Rec, they covered penguins years age. ☺
Conservatives are freaking out about I don’t care, they’ve proven they are idiots and will believe anything
What'll really freak them out is learning that people are animals too...
IF PEOPLE EVELEVEVOD FROM MONKEYS WHYARE THEREA STILL MONKEYS!?!?!
CHECKMEAT ATHEASTS
Wait until they Google "bilateral gynandromorphism".
Bold of you to assume that they can spell either to a close enough approximation that the Google suggestion is correct..
I was told that all these things happen because Eve ate the forbidden fruit and doomed the world to fall into sin. I guess that is why they hate women so much.
Also, I am glad to hear about another interesting documentary. I'm going to add this to my watch list.
Lazy reporting. Three comments on X is not a freak out. What happened to journalism? When did it become copying and pasting comments from social media?
It's lgbtqnation, one of the most crappy outlets when it comes to unnecessarily charged language when it comes to pushing an agenda.
I'm willing to bet the majority of it's supporters shit on foxnew viewers for being easily manipulated.
Some poor excuse for journalism is better than anything fox news ever has to say. The time where they had any credibility at all has long since passed. At least those Twitter posts are real...
I'll give you foxnews is worse, but that's faint praise.
LGBTQNation has an agenda? That's ABSURD! It's OBVIOUSLY a very balanced outlet as you can CLEARLY see in it's name! Anyways I'm going to go watch Fox NEWS.
yawn... why do we still sit around and talk in flabbergasted bewilderment about how dumb conservatives are? WE KNOW THEY'RE FUCKING IDIOTS. the question is 'what are we going to do about it?' - continue to let them have a say in democracy?
say what you want about them but they're doing a pretty good job of forcing their agenda on US because most of YOU are too chickenshit to do anything to stop them.
Yes, because without their voice, it's not democracy anymore. That's how democracy works. The only thing you really can do is try to educate the ignorant.
yeah, that's not working, and i'm more interested in avoiding the consequences of their policies than i am protecting their freedom. they've been educated for the last 2 decades and they've only dug their heels in deeper. there's only one solution at this point.
I'll hear what they have to say, but if it's not grounded in science/reason/common sense, it has no place in law. And their votes shouldn't be worth a staggering amount more than everyone else's.
It's still democracy if it has entry requirements, and it'd probably function better.
Voting tests in the US were abolished for a reason
Because they were explicitly created to disenfranchise black people.
We will soon have churches for animals that also can operate without taxes
Learning and incorporating new information aren’t really their strong suits.
You love to see it
Oh yeah, they will definitely watch with a name like that and will definitely learn from it
Again?
Does anybody remember the And Tango Makes Three fiasco?
This is such an absurd "article". Picking out a couple of comments from the internet to literally brew conflict for clicks is not sound journalism.
You guys seem to love living in an echochamber. Lemmy really has become very unwelcoming to anyone centrally aligned or learning about the world.
I don't get what's centrist about LGBTQ+ rights.
Anything restricting equal rights for all based on sexuality, gender and orientation, color or creed is surely a far right, extremist position?
Whats centrist about "gay people exist?"
Yea it kinda sucks. You and I can be central together. Right here.
"stuck in the middle with you"
Lol just now?
George Clooney voiced a gay dog on South Park in '97.
Something happening in fiction is not proof it happens in real life.
I wonder what stories they will cook up of libdems that moved to the remotest corners of the world just to teach animals to be gay...
Just wait until they learn about anemone fish...
Are those the ones that basically convert based on what potential mates they run into?
If a male clownfish's mate dies, the male will change sex and mate with its offspring to continue the family line.
Presumably why Marlin was so desperate to find Nemo.
Yep. They basically have a social hierarchy where the dominant fish in a group is female. If the alpha female dies, then another female may become alpha, or a male will switch and become the alpha female. There are actually quite a few species where gender isn't determined solely by genetics. So essentially when Coral died, in reality Marlin would've changed to a female. Just imagine the reaction of the conservatives had they been more scientifically accurate in that movie...
Removed, homophobia.
Meanwhile, in 1986...
I am gay. I have had lots of gay sex. I have had lots of kinky over the top gay sex. I have talked about absolutely wild and over the top kinks with all kinds of people. I’m not trying to be gross, but to communicate that I have a statistically significant sample size.
I have never met a person who was a bug chaser. I’ve never spoken to one on Grindr, or seen one with that listed in their profile. They exist, and I’ve seen interviews with them online, but I’ve never met anyone like that in real life.
Some heterosexual women have sex with dogs - I’m not sure that it would be fair to extrapolate that to all heterosexual women.
I’ve never been to the Folsom Street fair, so I’m not sure why I am responsible or related to the behavior that happens there.
Removed, temp ban for continued homophobia.
Bro, I’m in multiple “homosexual communities you can found online.” I’ve never seen anything like what you are describing.
I can find all kinds of crazy and gross heterosexual pornography. I would not generalize the behaviors I see in heterosexual pornography to all heterosexuals. I would not generalize the wild and raunchy behavior of heterosexual men and women at Mardi Gras to all heterosexual men and women.
Go touch grass - there’s a good chance that you’ll actually interact with a real gay person, instead of the imaginary demons you created in your head.
Hence.. "subculture".
Read it again.. sub. culture.
Bro, it’s not my fault that you go out of your way to seek out extreme fetish gay porn content. I prefer the more routine stuff, but as long as it’s fantasy, feel free to fap to whatever you like.
Definitely not your fault. I admit, I intentionally look for the worst in people/groups and remind myself that such people exist.
Why would you deliberately seek out the worst in people/groups and then use that to condemn the entire group? Should I argue that the majority of straight men are pedophiles based on the popularity of child sexual abuse material?
Wait, so you admit that you, in your spare time for fun presumably, look for things the worst part of any groups do so that you can give other people excuses to hate them? Do you have any idea how retarded that is on every level? You just like to hate groups of people and go looking for excuses for it, it's like someone made a recipe on how to trick yourself with confirmation bias into being an even bigger bigot.
Also, just for fun, have you ever done that same thing with groups you belong to? Like, say for example, men, white people, heterosexuals, cisgenerders, neo-nazis, zoophiles?
First off, please just accept your sexuality so you can keep those fantasies private.
Secondly,
ROFLMAO
Yes, yes, there's a massive conspiracy by "the homos" to "attack heterosexuals with HIV" and you don't provide any proof, even though it's so easy to look it up?
Hmm... where else have I heard "DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH"? Oh right, in every debate with every flat earther, antivaxxer and gun nut or other some such right-leaning people who simply can't refrain from slopping their cognitive diarrhea all over the internet while not possessing the intellectual rigour to even attempt to source what I'm sure they must know to be incredibly unlikely things.
I think you're just a stupid asshole. No need to overthink this.
I think me using the internet for learning and using what I learned to make people like you screeech is the problem you're having. Don't be mad at me.. be mad at the communities who brag about the things they do and want to do and how they want to do it.
oh man you just learned about sociology didn't you?
You're pretending your personal views are general views.
You know that you can't write "as long as theres pride parades, I'll hate the homos", because you know that's wrong. You also can't even write that you personally dislike gay people, writing "there's many reasons to hate homosexuals", pretending (or deluding yourself) that other people are as homophobic as you.
We aren't.
Stand behind your bullshit or stfu instead of this vague "I'm saying what everyone is thinking". No, you're not, but you are telling us what you're thinking about.
Every group under the sun has haters. Pointing out some of the reasons why a group would be hated is just that.. pointing out reasons. Do I hate people who intentionally spread HIV? Yep, does that mean I hate any particular group they belong to? Nope.
Again, distancing language while still perpetuating the same shitty rhetoric of "disease spreaders". Pitiful.
Various forms of homosexuality account for roughly a tenth of the population, more or less. Only about 80% of people identify
You know spreading HIV on purpose is a severe crime in most of the world, right? Weird how you're not talking about how "as long as men continue their toxic masculinity in the guise of 'football matches', people will continue to hate them". Did you know there are men who purposefully kill other people? 'serial killers' they're called."
And there's a whole lot more killers than there are people spreading HIV on purpose. And you won't even believe this, there's a whole fucking culture (not even a subculture, but a culture) of making documentaries, tv-shows and podcasts about these 'serial killers'.
So that's why
I...everyone except definitely not me hates men.No you're not. You're listing your own personal rationalisations for your personal homophobia. And oh boy...
No, of course you don't hate them, you just think people are justified in hating them as long as they are in public. Don't you know people will just get over their biases if other people never confront them and they never see the people they hate? We just have to make every disliked minority disappear from public view and the bigots will magically get over it.
Don't you remember when black people gained equal rights in the law by disappearing from public for a while? It was only when they stopped being so in your face about their mistreatment that the bigots accepted them and gave them rights, right?
Why don't people like you have the fucking balls to just say what you think? Why is it always this, "Oh I'd be fine with them if they'd stop asking for me to be fine with them" kind of wishy-washy bullshit. Just fucking grow a pair and say you don't like seeing gay people in public because you think they are gross and weird.
wait until you find out about what heterosexual men due to children on the semi regular.
username checks out.
You have absolutely no idea what my username means.
Wait til you find out what liberals do to their children, every waking moment of their lives.
Thanks for playing, npc.
idk man, i think it's pretty clear. You want to uphold the normative values of days gone by.
nothing?