Serious LGBT Discussion

[Aero the Alcoholic Bat]

It's easier to get into through 2D than 3D, especially if you don't use human faces.

And that, my friends, is the reason why hentai or other forms of illustrated/CGI/AI is even worse for you mentally and spiritually, regardless of the disingenuous arguments by its proponents on why it's more "ethical" than live action pornography.

Been racking my brain about this for a while. The longer I've been using the site, the more homophobic (and also racist lol) I've felt but I've thought many times to myself, "am I actually homophobic or do I simply dislike that gayness is now politicized?"

If you criticize either the LGBTQ community or the lifestyle itself, you're "homophobic." It's not worth trying to argue, just accept it. Especially because we've found evidence that "homophobia" is even more ingrained and innate than homosexual orientation supposedly is.

If you'd actually give a long, critical look at actual LGBTQ history, you'd realize that politicizing gayness was the only possible way that the LGBTQ community could have gotten as far as it has and obtained tolerance and acceptance. As opposed to being merely tolerated at best, or outright criminalized at worst.

By dressing up the whole thing as a civil rights issue rather than a deeply unhealthy alternative sexual lifestyle that normies are justified in wanting to keep out of their communities.

They browbeat the APA into declassifying homosexuality as a mental illness or paraphilia, they wrote an entire instruction book on how to browbeat and cancel people for not being 100% on their side in the late 80s and early 90s. Even those who have never read the book have done a suspiciously good job at following its instructions.

Seeing that the whole movement involved browbeating normies into suppressing their gut instincts on the topic of homosexuality, seeing that it's opened the floodgates for even worse shit to hit the mainstream, can you really say that your gut instincts are wrong when they tell you that homosexuality is an abomination?

Considering I have gay friends in my life whom I consider very close, I can't say I truly dislike gay people; I just can't find it in my heart to simply hate someone simply for liking the same sex

It's probably not hatred, it's pity. Having homosexual proclivities is a terrible cross to bear, regardless of how society treats those with said proclivities.

 

[⋖ cørdion ⋗]

Been racking my brain about this for a while. The longer I've been using the site, the more homophobic (and also racist lol) I've felt but I've thought many times to myself, "am I actually homophobic or do I simply dislike that gayness is now politicized?". Considering I have gay friends in my life whom I consider very close, I can't say I truly dislike gay people; I just can't find it in my heart to simply hate someone simply for liking the same sex

Though I do slightly resent fags for being ground zero for trannydom.

Honest women don't let drop they're womb-havers online at every turn, and fags don't feel a need to tell people they're gay. Usually it's obvious but still.

I can stand troons who just wanna live but you can tell by the terminally online clothing that they're the obnoxious, groomed type.

 

[California Newt]

Currently reading a great book called "Brother-Making in Late Antiquity and Byzantium". Evidently the brother-making ritual that was falsely interpreted as a same-sex marriage rite in "Same-sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe" (author died of AIDS before its publication) was actually something that developed out of skete monasticism. Sometimes you'd get a group as small as two guys deciding they want to go be monks together.

The book is valuable for being very specific and rigorous about making it clear what dynamics are at work and where, and how they fit into the societies under discussion. It talks about how different societies (particularly Byzantium) understood eros in relation to different forms of friendship. It's also responding to a lot of what's in "Same-sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe".

Evidently there's a lot more literature out there about this stuff than I thought there was, although I think some of it can be pretty pricey (upwards of a Benjamin) if you're getting them legally. I found this book because I wandered off the street into a comparative religion library and looked up something like "social dynamics in Orthodox monasticism" on the computer they had next to the scanner. Lo-and-Behold, they had exactly what I was looking for.

I've assumed for a while now that the human element in homosexuality is really just the emotional dynamics of common initiation into some kind of spiritual tradition; the weird hypnosis cults and overt satanism over in the gooner thread seemed to confirm that (along with a random gnostic dude in the 4chan thread confirming that there's a bunch of occult activity in furry cons and ren-fairs).

Yeah, big time. There's porn sites for occultists. Even Epstein was doing it in his Phoenecian bath house, he would make business calls after reaching the point of near orgasm from exotic massages. I shit you not, furry conventions and other semi-orgy events like Renfaire have a lot of occultists there that get people for ritual sex.
The OTO itself has a lot of shit like this, one of the ladies at my local Oasis does erotic modeling for other members.
It's overall a great group to get into for people new to everything or those with experience, most Oasis' have a gnostic mass at least once a month. I'm going to one on Sunday in fact.

https://youtu.be/14Fp-DSN4bM

Regardless, this skete stuff is a lot more interesting.

And that, my friends, is the reason why hentai or other forms of illustrated/CGI/AI is even worse for you mentally and spiritually, regardless of the disingenuous arguments by its proponents on why it's more "ethical" than live action pornography.

I've only ever heard loli/shotafags say that. I've never heard anyone say "it's not gay if it's 2D".

That's actually my favorite go-to comparison when arguing with lolifags.

 

[Aero the Alcoholic Bat]

"it's not gay if it's 2D".

Neither have I. I think the point we were making is not that it isn't gay, but that it makes gayness (or stuff that's millions of times worse) seem more palatable. It's just that the lolifags would shit themselves if people got wiser to that fact.

 

[Rolex]

My first post in this thread, it's awesome to see this kind of discussion. It really isn't happening anywhere else in a direct manner, even though it may be the only way to actually make any cultural progress. In my opinion, degeneration of sexuality will the issue that crushes the West if it isn't halted.

I have an thought that I wanted opinions on. I put it in a spoiler because it's a wall of text.

Spoiler: wall of text

May have been discussed here in earlier posts, but I've wondered for a while now if it would be useful to create an extremely thorough categorized list of aberrant sexual "archetypes" for the purpose of directing discussions across the internet (and irl) in a better and more permanent direction. The current discussions across the internet are clearly not working, as every argument against the promotion of aberrant sexuality gets derailed by confusion over categories of affliction (or if/when it's an affliction at all). Some people have dipped their toe into categorization, usually for comedic or immediate argumentative purposes, but I haven't seen it done in a way that is actually fleshed out or even really accurate. Psychologists pretend to have it all understood but I don't trust anyone in that field whatsoever, specifically because of this topic.

A clear example of the problem:
The current mainstream conservative consensus on trans individuals is still, to this day, that every single trans-identifying person is doing so for virtually the same reasons. They acknowledge that there are differences between people like Blaire White and Dylan Mulaney, (who are more similar to each other than they are to, say, Chris Tyson or Audrey Hale) but these conservatives almost always chalk up their level of disagreement with trans identity to how passable a trans person is, with the exception of more hardcore Christians, who have the best conclusion imo but for more reasons than they know or would discuss, thus their argument ends up discarded in the grand scheme.
Even AGPs can be divided into subgroups that could more clearly define what we're talking about, when, and why.

I don't yet have a good framework in mind for such a list, but I really do think it could change the game, maybe even begin to turn the tides. Electing "based" leaders is not enough, they absolutely do not understand the scope of the problem. Even their harshest blanket legislation doesn't really do anything to halt the progression. It may even make it worse. I'd say KF has perhaps the best understanding of any group, anywhere. I haven't been on here long, but a lot of you guys have truly seen it all.

These activist groups want to make the whole topic into a soup of confusion on purpose, it provides more control and leverage while also being adaptable to avoid criticism that could reduce their foothold in society. Also because they know, more or less, that their worldview breaks down quickly under proper scrutiny. They lose ground every single time the general public learns more about them, it has just been an agonizingly slow process due to the confusion.

 

[DeadwastePrime]

holy shit, I can't believe this thread I made is still going. thank you all for contributing your voices and thoughts on this vdisucssion even after all this time.

beary they want to kill you for liking men get outta here before its too late

 

[California Newt]

I don't yet have a good framework in mind for such a list, but I really do think it could change the game, maybe even begin to turn the tides. Electing "based" leaders is not enough, they absolutely do not understand the scope of the problem.

It'd be like trying to empty the water from a sinking ship with a spoon. This stuff is metastasizing due to the state our culture.

I'm not saying that the list you're talking about would be useless; I'm sure it could be useful in a lot of ways. The bigger-picture commonality, though, is that all the subtypes share a false anthropology. That's a problem that Western civilization can't solve in its current form: the West is characterized by its unstable, indefinite, "evolving" cosmological and anthropological model. This puts it at odds with every natural human society. This was bad enough during the peak scientism of the twentieth century, but it's actually even worse now that faith in the scientific establishment is breaking down (in part due to recent overreaches, and in part due to true critiques of its epistemology made by the left and others in the mid-twentieth century).

There's nothing solid to clamp your fist on; with no moorings, all that's left is the origin-point of the lizard-brain. Fetishism (originally an anthropological term denoting cult objects) supplants any form of mystical experience or higher expression, because there's nothing definite "out there"—not God; not the "higher self" or "oversoul" of the nineteenth-century; not even the Positivist material world of the twentieth.

The universe contracts to nothing but coom and death.

Spoiler: possible solution

I think the solution probably has to start with artists, after the recent philosophical victories over new-atheism that we've been seeing. Artists are the people who can prove on an experiential level that there's something more fundamental and primordial to life than coom. That more fundamental thing also can't be occultism, because if you know anything about it that's just the anti-truth, annihilationist cum-and-death religion.

There's motion towards a more grounded approach to truth in some of the religious transformations happening (in the U.S. at least—whose religious arbitrariness in the past is a big part of what led to the current problem), but those movements haven't really been felt in the art world yet. If you look at various "Christian" artist groups on discord or whatever, they're all drawing "ironic" troonslop like Hazbin Hotel (unless Vivzie has TERF leanings; I wouldn't know). There needs to be more to the new religious culture than people making podcasts about it and having philosophical arguments, and I think has to start from drawing inspiration out of the dynamics inherent to the core spiritual practice of the tradition in question (this is also why it can't come from an ecumenical, "pan-Christian" movement: the lowest-common-denominator, C.S. Lewis "Mere Christianity" type of art will always resonate and satisfy less than bare coom-psychology will).

I think books like "Brother Making in Late Antiquity and Byzantium" can be useful in that regard; there needs to be more understanding of how people related to each other in the past—we're like an entire culture raised in an abusive incestuous household: we don't know what normal feelings are like or how to express them. There also needs to be more small book-clubs and other creatively-based fraternal organizations. Prayer groups especially, and authentic ones—the competition is the gooncave, where there are no atheists: the serious ones are unironically praying mantras to Satan and Priapus (see the gooner thread linked in my previous post). They might not believe it, but their brains do.

beary they want to kill you for liking men get outta here before its too late

@bearycool A number of users apparently couldn't handle serious LGBT discussion and ran away to snicker from other threads. They're free to prove that characterization wrong.

 

[bearycool]

this is my contribution to our LGBTQ discussion: I hate crimed a closeted homo named Andrew, and got like 100,000 views in less than 24 hours lol.

 

[Harm]

Serious LGBT question here; with Pride Month coming up, I've never been to a Pride Parade or anything and was curious if it was worth going with my boyfriend if we don't intend on having any casual sex with strangers. Our state is pretty liberal (Oregon) and will definitely have a few parades and more, but I don't want to go if it's going to be either painfully lame or just a glorified series of orgies.

 

[AnZero]

Studies have been done, aside from the oft repeated claim that autists are overrepresented amongst troons, only 60% or so of autists identify as heterosexual.

It seems to me that autistic people are less likely to grasp that homosexuality is abnormal and disgusting and unhealthy than normies are, even if the normies are too scared of the backlash to admit their innate homophobia out loud.

The whole concept of "neurodiversity" is retarded for that reason alone, autists being less likely to resist being groomed into weird, unhealthy alternative lifestyles.

Personal theory with no real proof here but I think a major aspect of it is the complete social unawareness and their overall confusion about what things mean. Separating from how internet porn seems to completely MKUltra them, I believe it is likely that autists are more prone to being homosexual simply because they do not undergo a traditional social development understand complex emotions, at least not in a way a normie does. There's an internet joke about being nice to the weird kid in class and he comes back the next day with flowers and a love letter and stuff, it's kinda like that. Autists likely have difficulty understanding the difference between liking someone a lot because they are a good friend to you and liking someone because you have an actual romantic attraction to them. I think a lot of autists, at least males, are often completely removed from dating and are usually only around guys too, which likely doesn't help them form normal sexual or social habits. It's a complex thing but we will never get an answer to it. There's no way any scientific study will look into things like this, at least not in our current year. TLDR: being likely isolated from any women and having an improperly wired brain likely affects how someone sexually develops and understands themself.

 

[HootersMcBoobies]

I don't want to go if it's going to be either painfully lame or just a glorified series of orgies.

You should go to one just to see it. Any place in Oregon is going to have one of the more .. complete (for lack of a better word) versions. I've been to the one in Seattle years ago and it was quite insane; stretching ~10 or more blocks and going on for several hours.

The first big one I went to was back in 2010 in Ohio. It was a pretty big spectacle compared to the smaller city I grew up in. I saw people I knew marching with their companies (There were a dozen or so Kroger employees .. big company in Ohio). Honestly, a lot of it is somewhat tame. Unless you're in San Fransisco, you're not going to see people with their dicks out in public. There were a lot of floats with gay men dancing in boxers, some drag queens, etc. There were some kids walking around, but none in drag and I didn't think much of it back then.

I did remember talking to a high school lesbian friend of mine after and asking her, "Does this really help your cause? It seems really ... sexual." I was still very left-leaning back then and I started to question if these displays were really beneficial. I've had some other left-leaning friends saying that it's going to be somewhat sexual, because it's about peoples' sexuality.

In Seattle years later, it honestly was very similar, just much much larger. I did see one obese lard bitch walking around with only bikini bottoms on, totally topless. It was pretty disgusting, but even full nudity wasn't that common, even in Seattle. There was some weird fetish stuff and people in leather/dog costumes.

I've since talked to people who went to the more tame pride parades in places like Georgia around the same time periods and they were absolutely disgusted by what they saw. I think even at that time, if I has talked to them, I would have understood their concerns. Like I said, the first big one I went to, I honestly wasn't entirely sure about it, and I was a pretty hard liberal.

If you go, let us know your experiences and what you though. They certainly do expose the more extreme parts of the culture for sure, and it's important to be aware of that.

 

[Harm]

Any place in Oregon is going to have one of the more .. complete (for lack of a better word) versions. I've been to the one in Seattle years ago and it was quite insane; stretching ~10 or more blocks and going on for several hours.

That's what I figured, and I don't mind some of that stuff as long as it's not the sole onus of the event. A dude in a leather pup mask isn't going to upset me.

Appreciate the insight from someone who's been to a few. I'll make sure we hit up some of the local festivities and report back in June.

 

[California Newt]

Following up from the "brother-making" book:

The sections on paired monasticism and teacher-disciple relationships was interesting, as was the explanation of homosociality in Byzantium. The footnotes were extremely useful, as they pointed to a number of books more squarely focused on male-male interactions in late antiquity.

One of these was an analysis of St. Gregory the Theologian's funerary oratory for St. Basil the Great:

5 J. Børtnes, “Eros Transformed: Same-Sex Love and Divine Desire. Reflections on the Erotic Vocabulary in St. Gregory of Nazianzus’s Speech on St. Basil the Great,” in Greek Biography andPanegyric, ed. Hägg and Rousseau, 180–93.

An excerpt from said oration:

After only a short time in Athens, my longing desire turns me into Homer’s horse, and breaking the bonds of those who restrained me, I thunder over the plains, running towards my mate.

St. Gregory of Nazianzus, Or. 43.24.28-31

Again:

I can understand why a lot of people today don't know that something like this is even possible.
This is a messy thought, but I wonder if part of the problem is that our culture assumes a crypto-"magical" world-view, where pursuit of the "highest principle" is self-directed and inherently involves the manipulation of sexual energies.

Personal theory with no real proof here but I think a major aspect of it is the complete social unawareness and their overall confusion about what things mean. Separating from how internet porn seems to completely MKUltra them, I believe it is likely that autists are more prone to being homosexual simply because they do not undergo a traditional social development understand complex emotions, at least not in a way a normie does. There's an internet joke about being nice to the weird kid in class and he comes back the next day with flowers and a love letter and stuff, it's kinda like that. Autists likely have difficulty understanding the difference between liking someone a lot because they are a good friend to you and liking someone because you have an actual romantic attraction to them. I think a lot of autists, at least males, are often completely removed from dating and are usually only around guys too, which likely doesn't help them form normal sexual or social habits. It's a complex thing but we will never get an answer to it. There's no way any scientific study will look into things like this, at least not in our current year. TLDR: being likely isolated from any women and having an improperly wired brain likely affects how someone sexually develops and understands themself.

I don't get the impression that "non-autists" understand themselves very well either. They read boundaries better, but really understanding people means crossing those boundaries. That's always going to take courage, whether to be vulnerable or to weather a bad situation. No-one's born a psychologist.

Autists withdraw (often into weird sex stuff), and non-autists coast (preventing themselves from developing discernment). Both are manifestations of cowardice that you see in many, if not most, people. That's how I see it at least.

 

[Unifier of Hispania]

I believe it is likely that autists are more prone to being homosexual simply because they do not undergo a traditional social development understand complex emotions, at least not in a way a normie does

I understand where you come from, but I don't believe so. I think that homosexuality is Evolution's way of making sure that people with bad genetics don't pass them on to the next generation.

Consider that homosexuals are more likely to be:

- Autistic
- Hipersexuals
- Mentally ill
- Violent partners (in the case of lesbians)

Do you think someone like that is fit to reproduce? Obviously not.

 

[AnZero]

I understand where you come from, but I don't believe so. I think that homosexuality is Evolution's way of making sure that people with bad genetics don't pass them on to the next generation.

Consider that homosexuals are more likely to be:

- Autistic
- Hipersexuals
- Mentally ill
- Violent partners (in the case of lesbians)

Do you think someone like that is fit to reproduce? Obviously not.

You may be onto something here. You never really see any attractive or healthy looking homosexuals.

 

[Piggle-o]

but I don't want to go if it's going to be either painfully lame or just a glorified series of orgies.

It's quite the show. I don't know, I don't find a bunch of shirtless dudes all that hot. You might meet some others just there for the show and the comradery and it not turn into an orgy if you don't want it to.

 

[Picnic_Boy]

I've never understood the appeal of Pride parades. At the best of times, it's a bunch of people waving at each other. At the worst, it's a roiling Hieronymus Bosch painting.

 

[Myrtle the Turtle]

I've never understood the appeal of Pride parades.

Pride parades were a bigger thing in the 1980s-early 2000s when representation and visibility actually were important mediums to spread awareness. It always had sexual elements, but over the years its gotten more degenerate with kinks and trannies. Now they are just an excuse for gay people to meet, have sex and party in June. Its a social event, like a convention.

If you're gay, its worth it to go once just to witness it. People either love it or hate it.

 

[Hooked on phobics]

I've never understood the appeal of Pride parades. At the best of times, it's a bunch of people waving at each other. At the worst, it's a roiling Hieronymus Bosch painting.

Branding. Literally fucking Branding. That's LITERALLY it, it's no more or less complicated than that, it's branding like a commercial selling you dried up grain waste coated in sugar and other crap with a cartoon tiger who's both buff , and happy looking, so you associate fitness and happiness with something barely resembling food.

I GUARANTEE YOU if kiwi farms could have a parade without disturbances with memes about Chris Chan, rackets, bossman, ect, and make cute wholesome looking kiwi merch and just hand it out for free, you could probably get kiwi farms users to triple in a month, and help the reputation because so many might say "but kiwi farms parade was so fun, free Candy, and shows, and everyone friendly, ect".

That's ALL IT IS, AND this is why they are big on bringing kids. As someone who WAS a kid around 10 being brought there it made me truly think for a while that gays were nice with no flaws whatsoever and the deviancy I did see was just "weird silliness". This eventually faded but a kid brought there, seeing shows, getting free Candy, ect, that's GOING to trick young minds. And even older but dumb people will think "so what if they spread aids, everyone is so nice at the parade"

It's a yearly organized pr stunt / branding.

 

[California Newt]

You may be onto something here. You never really see any attractive or healthy looking homosexuals.

Jeffrey Dahmer