Conquer Club

b.k. barunt wrote:What creeps me out on this issue is how incredibly easy it is to manipulate the sheeple in this country. 9 out of 10 people on this forum would do a complete about face within a week if they were told that they were politically incorrect in their present viewpoint.

Up until 1973, homosexuality was defined as a neurosis, caused in most observed cases by childhood trauma. This definition, according to the APA (American Psychiatric Association), was arrived at by reason of numerous experiments and case studies. Suddenly, in 1973, as a result of intensive lobbying by gays and lesbians, the APA does an inexplicable turnaround and says * * Gilda Radner voiceover * * "never mind". So according to our mental health experts, it is now no longer a neurosis, but a completely normal lifestyle. This change is not due to any new experiments that disproved the old ones, but is reclassification by fiat.

Next, we have a marked push by the media to have everyone accept the gay lifestyle as perfectly normal. TV shows, movies, commercials, editorials, etc. , all showing cute, sensitive John Ritter types getting bullied by ugly simians who belong to the KKK and look like Adolf Hitler, and everyone sucks it right up with the rest of their daily pap allotment. Queer becomes "gay", and all the sheeple march in step.

Finally, they give us a new word - the all encompassing "HOMOPHOBIC". Should you become the object of this terrible word, you will be classified as a "racist" and a "redneck", and you will be deemed by Oprah and Rosie - our modern day oracles - to be stoopit. We now have the huge "Gay Pride" parade in New York, and no one seems to notice that NAMBLA reps march along in it with a banner of their own.

Personally, the thought of a man lusting after the hairy ass of another man makes me nauseated, but not half as nauseated as watching all the cow eyed sheeple bending over backwards to be politically correct. Oh well, life among the droids.

b.k. barunt wrote:What creeps me out on this issue is how incredibly easy it is to manipulate the sheeple in this country. 9 out of 10 people on this forum would do a complete about face within a week if they were told that they were politically incorrect in their present viewpoint.

Up until 1973, homosexuality was defined as a neurosis, caused in most observed cases by childhood trauma. This definition, according to the APA (American Psychiatric Association), was arrived at by reason of numerous experiments and case studies. Suddenly, in 1973, as a result of intensive lobbying by gays and lesbians, the APA does an inexplicable turnaround and says * * Gilda Radner voiceover * * "never mind". So according to our mental health experts, it is now no longer a neurosis, but a completely normal lifestyle. This change is not due to any new experiments that disproved the old ones, but is reclassification by fiat.

Next, we have a marked push by the media to have everyone accept the gay lifestyle as perfectly normal. TV shows, movies, commercials, editorials, etc. , all showing cute, sensitive John Ritter types getting bullied by ugly simians who belong to the KKK and look like Adolf Hitler, and everyone sucks it right up with the rest of their daily pap allotment. Queer becomes "gay", and all the sheeple march in step.

Finally, they give us a new word - the all encompassing "HOMOPHOBIC". Should you become the object of this terrible word, you will be classified as a "racist" and a "redneck", and you will be deemed by Oprah and Rosie - our modern day oracles - to be stoopit. We now have the huge "Gay Pride" parade in New York, and no one seems to notice that NAMBLA reps march along in it with a banner of their own.

Personally, the thought of a man lusting after the hairy ass of another man makes me nauseated, but not half as nauseated as watching all the cow eyed sheeple bending over backwards to be politically correct. Oh well, life among the droids.

suggs wrote:

MR. Nate wrote:

HayesA wrote:I seriously cannot understand why people feel as though homosexuality is so "wrong??" If any of you answer because of a book that's well over 1,500 years, i'll simply ignore you.

I love the way that you have made tolerance and diversity such a pillar in your life. Your unceasing efforts to understand opposing points of view are an inspiration to us all.

Bit like St. Paul, then?

b.k. barunt wrote:Up until 1973, homosexuality was defined as a neurosis, caused in most observed cases by childhood trauma. This definition, according to the APA (American Psychiatric Association), was arrived at by reason of numerous experiments and case studies. Suddenly, in 1973, as a result of intensive lobbying by gays and lesbians, the APA does an inexplicable turnaround and says * * Gilda Radner voiceover * * "never mind". So according to our mental health experts, it is now no longer a neurosis, but a completely normal lifestyle. This change is not due to any new experiments that disproved the old ones, but is reclassification by fiat.

b.k. barunt wrote:Next, we have a marked push by the media to have everyone accept the gay lifestyle as perfectly normal.

b.k. barunt wrote:Queer becomes "gay", and all the sheeple march in step.

b.k. barunt wrote:Finally, they give us a new word - the all encompassing "HOMOPHOBIC".

b.k. barunt wrote:We now have the huge "Gay Pride" parade in New York, and no one seems to notice that NAMBLA reps march along in it with a banner of their own.

b.k. barunt wrote:Personally, the thought of a man lusting after the hairy ass of another man makes me nauseated

b.k. barunt wrote:Personally, the thought of a man lusting after the hairy ass of another man makes me nauseated, but not half as nauseated as watching all the cow eyed sheeple bending over backwards to be politically correct. Oh well, life among the droids.

Guiscard wrote:

b.k. barunt wrote:Personally, the thought of a man lusting after the hairy ass of another man makes me nauseated, but not half as nauseated as watching all the cow eyed sheeple bending over backwards to be politically correct. Oh well, life among the droids.

I'm fairly sure that the APA removed homosexuality from the mental disorder list because of pioneering work from people like Evelyn Hooker and Alfred Kinsey, as well general mounting pressure from within the psychological field. The reason it is not, and should not, be classified as a mental disorder is because homosexuals can quite easily be entirely comfortable with themselves, function perfectly well in society, homosexuality poses no harmful effects to themselves or to those around them... i.e. their mental state is no different to that of a heterosexual bar sexual preference. Homosexuality in itself does not provide any adverse affects physically or mentally. It WAS due to new experiments and new research.

That given, your final few paragraphs are really only moral judgments. We get it. You don't like gays.

b.k. barunt wrote:

Guiscard wrote:

b.k. barunt wrote:Personally, the thought of a man lusting after the hairy ass of another man makes me nauseated, but not half as nauseated as watching all the cow eyed sheeple bending over backwards to be politically correct. Oh well, life among the droids.

I'm fairly sure that the APA removed homosexuality from the mental disorder list because of pioneering work from people like Evelyn Hooker and Alfred Kinsey, as well general mounting pressure from within the psychological field. The reason it is not, and should not, be classified as a mental disorder is because homosexuals can quite easily be entirely comfortable with themselves, function perfectly well in society, homosexuality poses no harmful effects to themselves or to those around them... i.e. their mental state is no different to that of a heterosexual bar sexual preference. Homosexuality in itself does not provide any adverse affects physically or mentally. It WAS due to new experiments and new research.

That given, your final few paragraphs are really only moral judgments. We get it. You don't like gays.

While studying for my degree in social work, 1997-2002, i was told by my social work professors that it had been "proven" that homosexuality was biologically based. They cited a "gay twins" experiment, and an experiment where the hypothalamus of the brain was larger in gays than in straights. Upon researching this, i found that the gay twins exp. was NEVER repicated (doesn't an experiment have to be replicated a number of times before being taken seriously?), and the guy responsible for the "gay brain" experiment was indicted for fraud - i have the details if you'd like elaboration on that. My point is that here was more propaganda - teachers teaching as fact something that was not. I wrote an editorial that was published by the school newspaper, and the head of the social work dept. told me he would "talk to these teachers". 3 years later, these 2 experiments were still being cited as "proof" by these same teachers.
Kinsey's "pioneering" work, which i also studied, is taken about as seriously as the Piltdown Man by straight and gay scholars alike at this time, but maybe your googling didn't tell you that. So if the 1973 change "WAS" due to new experiments, as you say, that were properly replicated, maybe you could google some up for us - make sure you add "replicated" to your google search.

Considering that one of your 2 "pioneering" sources is laughable (i'm not familiar with Evelyn) i would say that it's possible that you are presenting us with your own moral judgements. We get it. You like gays.

hecter wrote:Whothefuck cares whether or not is biological or psychological? The fact of the matter is, that's the way they are, they didn't choose to be that way, and they're not going to change or go away.

hecter wrote:Whothefuck cares whether or not is biological or psychological? The fact of the matter is, that's the way they are, they didn't choose to be that way, and they're not going to change or go away.

Guiscard wrote:

hecter wrote:Whothefuck cares whether or not is biological or psychological? The fact of the matter is, that's the way they are, they didn't choose to be that way, and they're not going to change or go away.

If its classified as a psychological disease then that has fairly profound implications, primarily for the equal rights legislation in place today. It also means psychologists would advocate attempting to 'cure' homosexuals by turning them straight.

Psychological is different to neurosis. We're arguing over the neurosis definition (which, interestingly, is still in use by the US armed forces, apparently).

MR. Nate wrote:

hecter wrote:Whothefuck cares whether or not is biological or psychological? The fact of the matter is, that's the way they are, they didn't choose to be that way, and they're not going to change or go away.

It's important because if it's biological, it simply is, through no fault of anyone's. If it is psychological, if it's aberrant behavior with preventable causes, than there needs to be treatment to help them overcome it.

unriggable wrote:Umm, BK, the experiment doesn't need to be replicated to be proven correct. There are countless experiments that have yet to be done again, yet they are for the most part accurate. Remember, no experiments have been done to suggest otherwise.

Guiscard wrote:

unriggable wrote:Umm, BK, the experiment doesn't need to be replicated to be proven correct. There are countless experiments that have yet to be done again, yet they are for the most part accurate. Remember, no experiments have been done to suggest otherwise.

Err... be careful with that one... They do indeed need replication really... Kinsey was shaky ground apparently (after further googling), although there are plenty of people who have both defended and refined his work to 'clean' the abhorrent data.

Guiscard wrote:

b.k. barunt wrote:

Guiscard wrote:

b.k. barunt wrote:Personally, the thought of a man lusting after the hairy ass of another man makes me nauseated, but not half as nauseated as watching all the cow eyed sheeple bending over backwards to be politically correct. Oh well, life among the droids.

I'm fairly sure that the APA removed homosexuality from the mental disorder list because of pioneering work from people like Evelyn Hooker and Alfred Kinsey, as well general mounting pressure from within the psychological field. The reason it is not, and should not, be classified as a mental disorder is because homosexuals can quite easily be entirely comfortable with themselves, function perfectly well in society, homosexuality poses no harmful effects to themselves or to those around them... i.e. their mental state is no different to that of a heterosexual bar sexual preference. Homosexuality in itself does not provide any adverse affects physically or mentally. It WAS due to new experiments and new research.

That given, your final few paragraphs are really only moral judgments. We get it. You don't like gays.

While studying for my degree in social work, 1997-2002, i was told by my social work professors that it had been "proven" that homosexuality was biologically based. They cited a "gay twins" experiment, and an experiment where the hypothalamus of the brain was larger in gays than in straights. Upon researching this, i found that the gay twins exp. was NEVER repicated (doesn't an experiment have to be replicated a number of times before being taken seriously?), and the guy responsible for the "gay brain" experiment was indicted for fraud - i have the details if you'd like elaboration on that. My point is that here was more propaganda - teachers teaching as fact something that was not. I wrote an editorial that was published by the school newspaper, and the head of the social work dept. told me he would "talk to these teachers". 3 years later, these 2 experiments were still being cited as "proof" by these same teachers.
Kinsey's "pioneering" work, which i also studied, is taken about as seriously as the Piltdown Man by straight and gay scholars alike at this time, but maybe your googling didn't tell you that. So if the 1973 change "WAS" due to new experiments, as you say, that were properly replicated, maybe you could google some up for us - make sure you add "replicated" to your google search.

Considering that one of your 2 "pioneering" sources is laughable (i'm not familiar with Evelyn) i would say that it's possible that you are presenting us with your own moral judgements. We get it. You like gays.

A quick google gives us replication of Hooker's experiment by N Thompson, B McCandless, & B Strickland, who actually widened the study to include females (whereas the original study had only included men). All come to the same conclusion. There are hundreds of other references.

All I'm trying to show is that it is impossible for you to state that you believe the 'turnaround' from neurosis was based solely on political correctness... That is simply ridiculous.

b.k. barunt wrote:

Guiscard wrote:

b.k. barunt wrote:

Guiscard wrote:

b.k. barunt wrote:Personally, the thought of a man lusting after the hairy ass of another man makes me nauseated, but not half as nauseated as watching all the cow eyed sheeple bending over backwards to be politically correct. Oh well, life among the droids.

I'm fairly sure that the APA removed homosexuality from the mental disorder list because of pioneering work from people like Evelyn Hooker and Alfred Kinsey, as well general mounting pressure from within the psychological field. The reason it is not, and should not, be classified as a mental disorder is because homosexuals can quite easily be entirely comfortable with themselves, function perfectly well in society, homosexuality poses no harmful effects to themselves or to those around them... i.e. their mental state is no different to that of a heterosexual bar sexual preference. Homosexuality in itself does not provide any adverse affects physically or mentally. It WAS due to new experiments and new research.

That given, your final few paragraphs are really only moral judgments. We get it. You don't like gays.

While studying for my degree in social work, 1997-2002, i was told by my social work professors that it had been "proven" that homosexuality was biologically based. They cited a "gay twins" experiment, and an experiment where the hypothalamus of the brain was larger in gays than in straights. Upon researching this, i found that the gay twins exp. was NEVER repicated (doesn't an experiment have to be replicated a number of times before being taken seriously?), and the guy responsible for the "gay brain" experiment was indicted for fraud - i have the details if you'd like elaboration on that. My point is that here was more propaganda - teachers teaching as fact something that was not. I wrote an editorial that was published by the school newspaper, and the head of the social work dept. told me he would "talk to these teachers". 3 years later, these 2 experiments were still being cited as "proof" by these same teachers.
Kinsey's "pioneering" work, which i also studied, is taken about as seriously as the Piltdown Man by straight and gay scholars alike at this time, but maybe your googling didn't tell you that. So if the 1973 change "WAS" due to new experiments, as you say, that were properly replicated, maybe you could google some up for us - make sure you add "replicated" to your google search.

Considering that one of your 2 "pioneering" sources is laughable (i'm not familiar with Evelyn) i would say that it's possible that you are presenting us with your own moral judgements. We get it. You like gays.

A quick google gives us replication of Hooker's experiment by N Thompson, B McCandless, & B Strickland, who actually widened the study to include females (whereas the original study had only included men). All come to the same conclusion. There are hundreds of other references.

All I'm trying to show is that it is impossible for you to state that you believe the 'turnaround' from neurosis was based solely on political correctness... That is simply ridiculous.

Great! You got the replication, now if you could just let me know which experiment you're talking about. If you're talking about the "Gay Twins" experiment, it hadn't yet been replicated in 1999 - hell the experiment itself wasn't done until more than 20 years after the 1973 turnaround, so why are you using it in reference to that?! You were hoping everyone would miss that? In 1973, no significant experiments had been done to overturn the mass of existing scientific evidence. The classification was changed as a result of political pressure - science was overuled by politics.

MR. Nate wrote:

suggs wrote:

MR. Nate wrote:

HayesA wrote:I seriously cannot understand why people feel as though homosexuality is so "wrong??" If any of you answer because of a book that's well over 1,500 years, i'll simply ignore you.

I love the way that you have made tolerance and diversity such a pillar in your life. Your unceasing efforts to understand opposing points of view are an inspiration to us all.

Bit like St. Paul, then?

Except without the examination of the topic, wit or intellect.

suggs wrote:

MR. Nate wrote:

suggs wrote:

MR. Nate wrote:

HayesA wrote:I seriously cannot understand why people feel as though homosexuality is so "wrong??" If any of you answer because of a book that's well over 1,500 years, i'll simply ignore you.

I love the way that you have made tolerance and diversity such a pillar in your life. Your unceasing efforts to understand opposing points of view are an inspiration to us all.

Bit like St. Paul, then?

Except without the examination of the topic, wit or intellect.

St. Paul has to rank as one of the least intelligent and most intolerant pricks ever to walk this fine planet.

suggs wrote:St. Paul has to rank as one of the least intelligent and most intolerant pricks ever to walk this fine planet.