Men of boards, what innocent behaviors have you changed out of fear?

silverharp

greencap wrote: »

I don't remember suggesting otherwise.

I picked up that you thought it was inefficient , however for evolution to "set up" a process where 40 % of the males would be unlikely to pass on their genes is a waste of wedding tackle no? it was civilisation that created a more level playing field , I believe the Vikings for one made/expected gay men marry anyway probably down to a high attrition rate if they were being killed in battle a lot.

ScumLord

greencap wrote: »

And what exactly have you given.

I've already said all I'm really doing is regurgitating what smarter people than me have found in their research. The problem is it's still kind of early days, there are a lot of stigmas around homosexuality that we're only getting out from under now. We assume things as people based on a very narrow experience. Homosexuality was something that has been part of the human experience since they were cavemen living in smaller groups. Homosexuality was considered a natural part of human culture in ancient societies, even really macho ones like the spartans.

Hating/dismissing homosexuals really depends on the society. I'm not accusing you of hating homsexuals, but you have a very dismissive and condescending view of them. Calling a natural state that's been in nature for millions if not billions of years a mistake or wrong, is an ignorant assumption based on relatively recent morals. You or I don't really know much beyond our limited experience. Even scientists specifically working on this type of things are only scraping the surface, but they've noticed nature is very accepting of a sexual orientation that doesn't seem to be useful from a reproductive perspective, a perspective we're told is the most important one in nature. But nature isn't quite as straightforward as the victorians assumed.

Just cause we're laypeople doesn't mean we're right or wrong.

I'm afraid it means we have no credibility. We might be right, we might be wrong and it's up to other people to trust us because not even we know for sure we're right or wrong because we don't have any experience or data to back up what we're saying.

Does the messenger matter. Facts aren't reliant on popularity.

Of course the messenger matters. If the messenger doesn't have a clue what he's talking about, or is trying to push an agenda using the subject why would his opinion carry any kind of weight.

Armchair Andy

Ive stopped holding doors open for women. Women with kids even. They rarely said thanks if ever.
Wont offer up a chair or do anything which i would consider gentlemanly either. Hate the way most women behave towards men in public.
And yeah im sexist in these regards. Used not to be. The more polite you are to some women the more they sh1t all over you.

Lux23

Are people (well men) actually complaining that they can't be sexist or homophobic anymore?

.......

This post has been deleted.

silverharp

Armchair Andy wrote: »

Ive stopped holding doors open for women. Women with kids even. They rarely said thanks if ever.
Wont offer up a chair or do anything which i would consider gentlemanly either. Hate the way most women behave towards men in public.
And yeah im sexist in these regards. Used not to be. The more polite you are to some women the more they sh1t all over you.

its a bit negative though, are you saying you would hold a door open for a man or you never did anyway? I'd think about it more from an equality point of view , feel free to act the same way in public regardless of gender.

Lux23

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I really should have stayed asleep.

.......

This post has been deleted.

ohnonotgmail

Lux23 wrote: »

I really should have stayed asleep.

does this mean you can now describe yourself as woke?

Armchair Andy

silverharp wrote:

its a bit negative though, are you saying you would hold a door open for a man or you never did anyway? I'd think about it more from an equality point of view , feel free to act the same way in public regardless of gender.

Always held doors open for anyone. I generally find its men who will hold a door for me mostly, whereas doors tend to come back in my face behind a woman.
Noticed it a lot recently at the swimming pool where the doors need full weight to open if the hands are full with kids bags and whatnot.
No woman has yet put a toe to the door for me, plenty of men with kids in tow have.
Either im butt ugly or theres a stench off me, or both. So now, its a blanket ban of holding the door for women under 50. Even if its blatant.

greencap

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Actually I said homosexuality is an error, in the context of evolution. Not homosexual men are a mistake.

Its your own twisting of language and emotionally dramatic nonsense that has brought about the end of offense culture.

Its gone now. Like 80's shoulder pads, you won't be seeing it again, other than perhaps in a brief ironic retro trend. People grew tired of the chalkboard ze zu zeh shyte.

pangbang

greencap wrote: »

Actually I said homosexuality is an error, in the context of evolution. Not homosexual men are a mistake.

Its your own twisting of language and emotionally dramatic nonsense that has brought about the end of offense culture.

Its gone now. Like 80's shoulder pads, you won't be seeing it again, other than perhaps in a brief ironic retro trend. People grew tired of the chalkboard ze zu zeh shyte.

I made a comment just a few minutes ago in the "bestiality" thread.

The point was that people will believe anything, and regularly will believe whatever they are told.

There is "reasoning" for everything nowadays, its literally a pointless battle, no matter what side of an argument you are on. The closer-knit we have all become through the wonderful internet, the more apparent the stupidity and gullibility of humans becomes. Again, from both sides of whatever argument.

There is only one rule these days, and one rule only.....control the mainstream media with the loudest voice and you can get people to swallow anything. F00king anything!

I could make a good stab at giving "good" reasons for existing on bread and cheese puffs for life, all I need is the platform to blast it out, catch a break, and off she goes, stupidity self-perpetuating across the world.

Best thing is to separate yourself as much as possible and take advantage of the stupidity. Or on the odd occasion that youre bored, engage the internet for a laugh (or reminder of disappointment!)

cgcsb

Personally the only thing that makes me moderate my behaviour is the rare occasion when I interact with an unrelated child. Also given that I work in mostly male environment, I may sometimes moderate things I would say if there were a woman present particularly with regard to male sexuality or my personal sexual/romantic life.

I don't ever feel the need to make sexist, homophobic or racist comments so that's not an issue for me. I find it quite distressing the sheer number of posters here who feel that they are muzzled from making homophobic comments. That poster who said he thinks gay guys are sick in the head and that they ought to have vaginas probably wasn't genuine but if he were I'd love him to express that 'opinion' on front of me because he'd get an unholy dressing down and an education.

two wheels good

Armchair Andy wrote: »

Ive stopped holding doors open for women. Women with kids even. They rarely said thanks if ever.
Wont offer up a chair or do anything which i would consider gentlemanly either. Hate the way most women behave towards men in public.
And yeah im sexist in these regards. Used not to be. The more polite you are to some women the more they sh1t all over you.

I must comment on this topic...
It's not a gender issue. It's an Irish thing.
Returning to Ireland I couldn't believe how usually I was ignored when holding open a door for someone - be they male or female. In contrast, for example in England, there is usually a thank you of some sort - a comment, a nod, a smile, eye-contact...
Instead of being annoyed at what I viewed as rudeness I've changed my attitude and I try to be amused to see what the reaction will be.
So ... please don't stop being courteous. It's the best attitude. (Or you could try the "you're welcome" retort.)

jobbridge4life

greencap wrote: »

Actually I said homosexuality is an error, in the context of evolution. Not homosexual men are a mistake.

Its your own twisting of language and emotionally dramatic nonsense that has brought about the end of offense culture.

Its gone now. Like 80's shoulder pads, you won't be seeing it again, other than perhaps in a brief ironic retro trend. People grew tired of the chalkboard ze zu zeh shyte.

No dude. You made a bullshizzle claim, that is patently ignorant, in every sense of the word. Were repeatedly and effectively challenged on it and then repeated the same nonsense again.

People are tired of internet-dudes with no knowledge making grandiose and plain stupid claims then acting like they're being victimized when people call that sh!t out.

greencap

jobbridge4life wrote: »

No dude. You made a bullshizzle claim, that is patently ignorant, in every sense of the word. Were repeatedly and effectively challenged on it and then repeated the same nonsense again.

People are tired of internet-dudes with no knowledge making grandiose and plain stupid claims then acting like their being victimized when people call that sh!t out.

Dont try to troll a troll.

I see you mofo.

jobbridge4life

pangbang wrote: »

I made a comment just a few minutes ago in the "bestiality" thread.

The point was that people will believe anything, and regularly will believe whatever they are told.

There is "reasoning" for everything nowadays, its literally a pointless battle, no matter what side of an argument you are on. The closer-knit we have all become through the wonderful internet, the more apparent the stupidity and gullibility of humans becomes. Again, from both sides of whatever argument.

There is only one rule these days, and one rule only.....control the mainstream media with the loudest voice and you can get people to swallow anything. F00king anything!

I could make a good stab at giving "good" reasons for existing on bread and cheese puffs for life, all I need is the platform to blast it out, catch a break, and off she goes, stupidity self-perpetuating across the world.

Best thing is to separate yourself as much as possible and take advantage of the stupidity. Or on the odd occasion that youre bored, engage the internet for a laugh (or reminder of disappointment!)

You compared consensual gay sex to men f@@king animals, a chicken in particular if I recall correctly... and you think you're the one laughing at others?

Armchair Andy

two wheels good wrote:

I must comment on this topic... It's not a gender issue. It's an Irish thing. Returning to Ireland I couldn't believe how usually I was ignored when holding open a door for someone - be they male or female. In contrast, for example in England, there is usually a thank you of some sort - a comment, a nod, a smile, eye-contact... Instead of being annoyed at what I viewed as rudeness I've changed my attitude and I try to be amused to see what the reaction will be. So ... please don't stop being courteous. It's the best attitude. (Or you could try the "you're welcome" retort.)

The "youre welcome" retort brings more trouble than its worth ime.
Believe me id prefer be courteous than an Ahole but its easier be the Ahole.
Im stubborn like that :-)

Outlaw Pete

PhiloCypher wrote: »

Also while I have no doubt the man who started this line of argument(homosexuality/free speech) me_right_one was telling the truth when he said he doesn't hurl abuse or act overtly homophobic , if this anti PC "I can say whatever I want" movement that Trumps at the forefront of ........

Trump's not homophobic........

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/240462265680289792

ScumLord

greencap wrote: »

Actually I said homosexuality is an error, in the context of evolution. Not homosexual men are a mistake.

The problem is evolution works through errors. One of the reasons there are people and earth isn't full of single celled organism is because mistakes were made that turned out beneficial. So saying something is an error doesn't mean it's bad, it also implies there's a correct and proper way. Your applying human morality to nature, your saying homosexuality is an error and implying it's wrong, because we were brought up to believe it is wrong. There seems to be no other reasoning behind your posts, we still haven't seen any science to back up what your saying and the only people who say homosexuality is unnatural, or wrong, is the religious.

.......

This post has been deleted.

greencap

ScumLord wrote: »

The problem is evolution works through errors. One of the reasons there are people and earth isn't full of single celled organism is because mistakes were made that turned out beneficial. So saying something is an error doesn't mean it's bad, it also implies there's a correct and proper way. Your applying human morality to nature, your saying homosexuality is an error and implying it's wrong, because we were brought up to believe it is wrong. There seems to be no other reasoning behind your posts, we still haven't seen any science to back up what your saying and the only people who say homosexuality is unnatural, or wrong, is the religious.

Again switching between perspectives.

One minute we're talking from a subjective human perspective.
The next we're talking from an objective perspective.

I at no point applied any kind of morality, so bullsht on that one.

I explained my opinion on the mechanism (of homosexuality) from two perspectives.
(1) Where we take evolution to have some kind of 'intention'.
(2) Where we don't take evolution to have any kind of 'intention'.

I don't know what additional science you need.
Homosexuality is a trait - this trait does not enhance the survivability of the species.
This trait also sees the expending of energy on sperm production, yet the gay man will not have an instinct which leads to reproduction using these sperm.


As far as I see it it takes billions of little events (intended or not) to build a human, and that construction takes place in an environment filled with random events, so you naturally end up with variances from the norm.

Some enhance species survival, some don't.

If it would make you feel better I'll refer to homosexuality as a non-species-survival-enhancing-inherent-characteristic.

Armchair Andy

greencap wrote:

If it would make you feel better I'll refer to homosexuality as a non-species-survival-enhancing-inherent-characteristic.

Brilliant. Only thing is,a non-species-survival-enhancing-inherent-characteristic bar doesn't roll off the tongue quite the same as gay bar though.