Re: German Sexologist says Committed Monogamous Homosexual Relationships a Myth
Ray Fischer
>http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
>.virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>
>GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
>HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
panam...@hotmail.com
> George Orwell <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>
> >http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
> >.virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>
> >GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
> >HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>
> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
Ray, you beat me to it. Primates are some of the horniest animals on
Earth. <g>
-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015/Member, Knights of BAAWA!
WangoTango
says...
> George Orwell <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
> >http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
> >.virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
> >
> >GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
> >HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>
> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
>
>
what others are doing.
From :
http://www.womansavers.com/infidelity-statistics.asp
Infidelity statistics
It's tough to get a handle on how many of us are having affairs, given
the inherent secrecy.
22 percent of married men have strayed at least once during their
married lives.
14 percent of married women have had affairs at least once during their
married lives.
Younger people are more likely candidates; in fact, younger women are as
likely as younger men to be unfaithful.
70 percent of married women and 54 percent of married men did not know
of their spouses' extramarital activity.
5 percent of married men and 3 percent of married women reported having
sex with someone other than their spouse in the 1997.
22 percent of men and 14 percent of women admitted to having sexual
relations outside their marriage sometime in their past.
Mason Barge
"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:49a58419$0$1658$742e...@news.sonic.net...
> George Orwell <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>>http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
>>.virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>>
>>GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
>>HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>
> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
Oh, nonsense. I don't know if this German is right or wrong about
homosexual fidelity, but I do know that there are an enormous number of
heterosexual marriages that last for life, with neither partner ever having
sex with someone else. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, even one incidence of
adultery is the exception, not the rule.
Russell Watson
A friend whose father was a homosexual in Houston, TX in the late
'70s/early-'80s and eventually died of AIDS told me that in his
observation of the lifestyle his dad and partner practiced that going
out and fucking some stranger was a basic revenge tactic for almost
every perceived slight in their community and that was one of the
reasons AIDS continued to spread so rampantly among them.
I'm not saying this is true, just what someone with a first-hand look
told me. The timeframe in which he was in a position to make these
observations probably has to be considered as well, as it was a
different time in terms of casual sex for both homos and straights.
Ray Fischer
>>>http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
>>>.virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>>>
>>>GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
>>>HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>>
>> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
>
>Oh, nonsense.
50% of all marriages end in divorce.
> I don't know if this German is right or wrong about
>homosexual fidelity, but I do know that there are an enormous number of
>heterosexual marriages that last for life,
And just as many that fail.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
No One
>> I don't know if this German is right or wrong about
>>homosexual fidelity, but I do know that there are an enormous number of
>>heterosexual marriages that last for life,
>
> And just as many that fail.
The German sexologist is wrong if he means the infidelity rate is 100%.
Rich
news:e0a75203730028d3...@mixmaster.it:
> http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
> .virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>
> GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
> HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>
> By David W. Virtue
>
> A leading German sexologist, Dr. Martin Dannecker, who is
> himself a
> homosexual, says fidelity between homosexual men living in a
> "committed
> relationship" is a myth.
That goes without saying. That's how AIDS spead like it did.
Mason Barge
> Mason Barge <mason...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>
>>>>http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
>>>>.virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>>>>
>>>>GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
>>>>HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>>>
>>> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
>>
>>Oh, nonsense.
>
> 50% of all marriages end in divorce.
#1, that's junk statistics. It isn't true.
#2, it isn't the question at issue. The man's thesis was:
"fidelity between homosexual men living in a 'committed relationship' is a
myth."
The appropriate figure for comparison is the number of relationships in
which adultery occurs versus the number of relationships in which the
partners don't have sex with anyone other than their spouse/partner.
A lot of people get divorced where neither person is "cheating".
thomas p.
"Mason Barge" <mason...@comcast.net> skrev i en meddelelse
news:DpydnYZbid8PKjvU...@giganews.com...
>
> "Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
> news:49a60e90$0$1623$742e...@news.sonic.net...
>> Mason Barge <mason...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>>
>>>>>http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
>>>>>.virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>>>>>
>>>>>GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
>>>>>HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>>>>
>>>> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
>>>
>>>Oh, nonsense.
>>
>> 50% of all marriages end in divorce.
>
> #1, that's junk statistics. It isn't true.
What data do you have that says otherwise?
>
> #2, it isn't the question at issue. The man's thesis was:
Actually it is the issue.
Since it was >
> "fidelity between homosexual men living in a 'committed relationship' is a
> myth."
>
> The appropriate figure for comparison is the number of relationships in
> which adultery occurs versus the number of relationships in which the
> partners don't have sex with anyone other than their spouse/partner.
>
> A lot of people get divorced where neither person is "cheating".
Oh? Do you base that on junk statistics?
Mason Barge
"thomas p." <gud...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:49a6c5f6$0$56774$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
>
> "Mason Barge" <mason...@comcast.net> skrev i en meddelelse
> news:DpydnYZbid8PKjvU...@giganews.com...
>>
>> "Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>> news:49a60e90$0$1623$742e...@news.sonic.net...
>>> Mason Barge <mason...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>>>
>>>>>>http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
>>>>>>.virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
>>>>>>HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>>>>>
>>>>> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
>>>>
>>>>Oh, nonsense.
>>>
>>> 50% of all marriages end in divorce.
>>
>> #1, that's junk statistics. It isn't true.
>
> What data do you have that says otherwise?
Here's what Truth or Fiction says about it. This just popped up at the top
of Google, there's a lot of analysis in print:
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/d/divorce.htm
>>
>> #2, it isn't the question at issue. The man's thesis was:
>
> Actually it is the issue.
I quoted the issue, which was something different. Why don't you quote me
something from the OP that deals with separation or divorce rates, rather
than infidelity rates inside non-divorced relationship?
In fact, the OP deals entirely with behavior of people who have NOT
"divorced" (i.e. ended a committed relationship).
> Since it was >
>> "fidelity between homosexual men living in a 'committed relationship' is
>> a myth."
>
>>
>> The appropriate figure for comparison is the number of relationships in
>> which adultery occurs versus the number of relationships in which the
>> partners don't have sex with anyone other than their spouse/partner.
>>
>> A lot of people get divorced where neither person is "cheating".
>
> Oh? Do you base that on junk statistics?
You're just sniping. Try citing a fact if you want to disagree.
Martin
The fact of marriage of not is a red-hearing. The paper was "Dr. Martin
Dannecker, says fidelity between homosexual men living in a "committed
relationship" is a myth.
Nothing about marriage. The control should have been heterosexual
couples living in a "committed relationship". In fact the entire thing
sounds like malarkey to me. There is nothing there about even living
together, just a self-described "committed relationship". There is no
comparison that can be made between his group and married group.
Try Reading on a Friday night, you'll see loads of people in committed
relationships copping of with other people.
If he wanted to compare marriage then he would have done - seeing as
he's in Germany.
thomas p.
>
> "thomas p." <gud...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:49a6c5f6$0$56774$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
>>
>> "Mason Barge" <mason...@comcast.net> skrev i en meddelelse
>> news:DpydnYZbid8PKjvU...@giganews.com...
>>>
>>> "Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>>> news:49a60e90$0$1623$742e...@news.sonic.net...
>>>> Mason Barge <mason...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>>>>http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
>>>>>>>.virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
>>>>>>>HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
>>>>>
>>>>>Oh, nonsense.
>>>>
>>>> 50% of all marriages end in divorce.
>>>
>>> #1, that's junk statistics. It isn't true.
>>
>> What data do you have that says otherwise?
>
> Here's what Truth or Fiction says about it. This just popped up at the
> top of Google, there's a lot of analysis in print:
>
> http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/d/divorce.htm
A transparent argument that does nothing to refute the 50% rate. If there
are a nearly equal number of divorces and marriages over a number of years,
claiming a 50% or close to 50% failure rate is valid.
>
>>>
>>> #2, it isn't the question at issue. The man's thesis was:
>>
>> Actually it is the issue.
>
> I quoted the issue, which was something different. Why don't you quote me
> something from the OP that deals with separation or divorce rates, rather
> than infidelity rates inside non-divorced relationship?
The obvious idea behind the post was that homosexuals are especially unable
to be faithful. The fact that very large numbers of marriages end in
divorce (just to use one indicator) calls that into question. The post made
no effort at all to compare the problems of homosexual couples with those of
heterosexual couples making it useless except as an example of bigotry.
>
> In fact, the OP deals entirely with behavior of people who have NOT
> "divorced" (i.e. ended a committed relationship).
>
>> Since it was >
>>> "fidelity between homosexual men living in a 'committed relationship' is
>>> a myth."
>>
>>>
>>> The appropriate figure for comparison is the number of relationships in
>>> which adultery occurs versus the number of relationships in which the
>>> partners don't have sex with anyone other than their spouse/partner.
>>>
>>> A lot of people get divorced where neither person is "cheating".
>>
>> Oh? Do you base that on junk statistics?
>
> You're just sniping. Try citing a fact if you want to disagree.
I have. Lack of fidelity or stability in a relationship is not limited to
homosexuals or heterosexuals. Another fact is that the original poster
quoted bits and pieces out of many different kinds of documents, making it
nearly impossible, without reading a very great deal of material, to judge
what was being said; it is my opinion that this was deliberate.
Mason Barge
Not true. That makes a lot of unstated assumptions -- most obviously, zero
population growth. Also, it is only marginally meaningful unless the
distribution is normalized for individuals.
thomas p.
Chuckle!
B0BANDCAR0LE
> http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
> .virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>
> GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
> HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>
>
> A leading German sexologist, Dr. Martin Dannecker, who is
> himself a
> "committed
> relationship" is a myth.
>
> a "steady"
> relationship in Bonn, 83 percent (747) persons said they had had
> frequent
> homosexual contacts outside their "steady" relationship within
> the last 12
> months.
>
> "In this context we must point out the clear differences in the
> manner of
> sexual gratification that exists between homosexual men living
> in a steady
> relationship and those who do not. Of those who were in a
> steady relationship
> at the time of the survey, the average number of homosexual
> contacts per
> person was approximately 115 in the past year. Homosexual men
> without a
> steady relationship had an average of about 45 homosexual
> contacts," said
> Dannecker.
>
> In his new book "The Joy of Gay Sex" Dr. Charles Silverstein
> one of the best
> known advocates of the "normality" of the homosexual lifestyle,
> says fidelity
> and monogamy are not necessarily the same thing. He writes:
> "Fidelity between
> lovers excludes the possibility of having sex with a third
> person; monogamy
> means that two people have declared themselves lovers - an
> intimate emotional
> and sexual relationship. The latter arrangement can include
> sexual adventures
> outside the relationship."
>
> Addressing the problem of "promiscuity", Silverstein writes:
> "The word
> ‘promiscuous' should be retired from the vernacular. As a rule
> of thumb, if a
> gay man is unattached there's no harm in his having as much
> (safe) sexual
> experience as he wants. If he has a lover, they should decide
> how much sex,
> if any, they want outside their relationship, and under what
> circumstances.
> One lover having sex without the other's knowledge is not
> promiscuous but
> dishonest; this situation is best viewed as a failure of
> communication rather
> than a moral flaw."
>
> American psychoanalyst Dr. Richard A. Isay in his book Being
> Homosexual: Gay
> Men and Their Sexual Development says, that many homosexual
> couples conclude
> an explicit or implicit agreement within their relationship,
> allowing sex
> outside it. "Sexual openness does not necessarily lead to the
> questioning of
> emotional fidelity. One type of fidelity is played off against
> another, and
> any use of the word would be based on its new definition."
>
> The Kinsey Institute which recently conducted a large-scale
> study of
> homosexual men concluded the following results: 75 percent of
> the respondents
> with a homosexual orientation had had between 100 and over 500
> partners in the
> course of their lives. 79 percent said that more than half of
> their sexual
> partners had been strangers. Only one percent of homosexually
> active men had
> had less than five sexual partners in their lives.
>
> A pioneer in the study of the "normality"of the homosexual
> lifestyle, Dr.
> Evelyn Hooker, concluded, after conducting a survey among 30
> male homosexual
> couples, that although all couples except three expressed "an
> intense longing
> for relationships with stability, sexual continuity, intimacy,
> love and
> affection," only one couple had been able to maintain a 10-year
> monogamous
> relationship. Hooker concluded: "For many homosexuals, one night
> stands or
> short term relationships are typical."
>
> The Journal of Homosexuality says that "homosexuality requires
> its own sets of
> principles and standards radically at odds with heterosexual
> culture" in which
> "one must learn to accept sex as primarily a recreational
> activity where going
> home with a partner can be as casual and uncommitted as picking
> up a partner
> as the tennis court for a few a sets."
>
> Commenting on this Dr. Christl VonHoldt who heads the German
> Institute for
> Youth and Society observed, "the reason why it is a myth is not
> because the
> affected men are not longing for a relationship of sexual
> faithfulness, but
> because homosexuality is an immature form of sexuality.
> Homosexuality is not
> directed towards the other person but is (often unconsciously)
> an expression
> of a desperate search for one's own sexual self."
>
> END
>
> --
>
> Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
> non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
> reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
> di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
> Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
> https://www.mixmaster.it
I have a juicy shaved pussy that squirts.
we are a white cpl, 40s, looking for bi female, or cpl w/bi female for
hot times. she is 5/7 fullfigured, 44dd tits, and a juicy shaved pussy
that squirts when she cums. he is 6/1 225, hairy chest, short beard,
and 7 inches. we seek people in the louisville, southern indiana area.
we can exchange pics. if interested, email us... kate_g @ amorous.com
Ray Fischer
>"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>> Mason Barge <mason...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>>
>>>>>http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
>>>>>.virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>>>>>
>>>>>GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
>>>>>HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>>>>
>>>> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
>>>
>>>Oh, nonsense.
>>
>> 50% of all marriages end in divorce.
>
>#1, that's junk statistics. It isn't true.
It's true and it's even easy to establish. Count the number of
recorded marriages that occur each year and compare with the number of
recorded divorces.
>#2, it isn't the question at issue. The man's thesis was:
>
>"fidelity between homosexual men living in a 'committed relationship' is a
>myth."
And it's just as true of heterosexual relationships.
>The appropriate figure for comparison is the number of relationships in
>which adultery occurs versus the number of relationships in which the
>partners don't have sex with anyone other than their spouse/partner.
>
>A lot of people get divorced where neither person is "cheating".
A lot of people cheat without getting divorced.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ray Fischer
>>>> 50% of all marriages end in divorce.
>>>
>>> #1, that's junk statistics. It isn't true.
>>
>> What data do you have that says otherwise?
>
>Here's what Truth or Fiction says about it. This just popped up at the top
>of Google, there's a lot of analysis in print:
>
>http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/d/divorce.htm
You must be kidding. Not only are there no statistics cited, not even
junk statictics, and there isn't even a decent argument.
Try this for something factual:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/divorce.htm
And notice that it supports my statement.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ol' Grand Bag
be a promiscuous act. It's kinda like the old saw, "Eatin' ain't
cheatin' "
Ray Fischer
>We fags do not consider receiving and/or giving a casual blow job to
>be a promiscuous act.
And you know this because you've been elected spokesqueen of the fags?
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Tom
Ohhhh, I get it...
Written by David W. VIRTUE
It's supposed to be funny.
Tom
dan...@rocketmail.com
> http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
> .virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>
> GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
> HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>
>
> A leading German sexologist, Dr. Martin Dannecker, who is
> himself a
> "committed
> relationship" is a myth.
I'm homosexual and said the same thing for years, only to be called
'homophobic' for my observation. Every gay relationship I've
witnessed has been 'open' and so dysfunctional and convoluted as to
rival anything on the Jerry Springer show.
Exaggerating only slightly, the definition of 'monogamy' among gay men
is having the same sex partner for more than 48 hours. Even 'Will &
Grace' poked fun at gay relationships by asking what the gay word for
'goodbye' was - 'good morning.'
Ray Fischer
>> A leading German sexologist, Dr. Martin Dannecker, who is
>> himself a
>> homosexual, says fidelity between homosexual men living in a
>> "committed
>> relationship" is a myth.
>
>I'm homosexual and said the same thing for years, only to be called
>'homophobic' for my observation. Every gay relationship I've
>witnessed has been 'open' and so dysfunctional and convoluted as to
>rival anything on the Jerry Springer show.
Every relationship that YOU have been in.
Can you tell us all what has been the common factor in all of YOUR
relationaships?
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
ne...@millions.com
I will patiently wait for Dank to answer that one.
DCI
K
> George Orwell <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>> http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
>> .virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>>
>> GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
>> HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>
> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
No. Queer romantic relationships are notoriously unstable, far more so
than heterosexual ones.
Sam Spade
They are hard on the rectum, too.
Nomen Publicus
Perhaps if we let them get married...
--
Isaac Asimov: Properly read, the Bible is the most potent
force for atheism ever conceived.
anonymous
Cites, please!
I mean the heterosexual divorce rate is around 45 percent and not all
people cheating on their spouse divorce, get caught and divorce and not
all unhappy people divorce.
anonymous
Well, being soft ont he rectum is no good either!
anonymous
>
> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
> > Ray Fischer wrote:
> >> George Orwell <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
> >>> http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
> >>> .virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
> >>>
> >>> GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
> >>> HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
> >>
> >> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
> >
> > No. Queer romantic relationships are notoriously unstable, far more so
> > than heterosexual ones.
>
> Perhaps if we let them get married...
>
Not only that but traditionally parents don't want to hear about who
their gay son or daughter is dating much less meet the person or invite
them to dinner. For heterosexual children, it is a totally different
story. The parents not only want to meet the person, but they want to
get to know the parents if they don't already know them.
Ray Fischer
50% of all hetersexual MARRIAGES end in divorce. The average number
of sexual partners for heterosexuals is around half a dozen. That's
hardly indicative of stable relationships.
Looks like you're just a dumbshit homophobe.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Ashton Crusher
You're being redundant.
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? <www.LayoffRemedy.com> ��
>>>> http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv.
>>>> virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>>>>
>>>> German sexologist says committed monogamous homosexual
>>>> relationships are a myth.
>>> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
>> No. [Gay] romantic relationships are notoriously unstable...
> 50% of all hetersexual MARRIAGES end in divorce. The average
> number of sexual partners for heterosexuals is around half a dozen.
> That's hardly indicative of stable relationships.
>
> Looks like you're just a dumbshit homophobe.
Yep. And one thing is for sure: No one will ever see an
INTELLIGENT homophobe. Bigotry and IGNORANCE go together.
And Taylor is one of the MOST ignorant of them. And just
keeps right on PROVING that to everyone.
The ONLY thing that human version of a sewer rat turd is
good for is earning �� OCR �� Points! He's *really* GOOD at
doing that. And thus, he actually (albeit inadvertently) IS making
a relevant contribution to hastening the demise of bigotry, and
making America a far BETTER place.
I *LOVE* watching bigots do that! They constantly shoot
their agendas right in the head, and they're so bone-dumb they
either don't realize it, or they can't help themselves. And in the
process, they can't even present any FACTS to support their
hate-agendas, because NO such facts even EXIST!
LOL!!! That combination is nothing short of hilarious!
The SELF-destruction of the bigots!
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
��� Operation Consciousness-Raising ��� ...
... THANKS you for your CONTRIBUTION to society as one of
the very BEST weapons that fair-minded, sensible, compassionate
and intelligent egalitarians have in their arsenal for supporting,
defending and promote full and equal access to all persona liber-
ties that either are legal already, or should be.
You see, a really great way of hastening the DEMISE of hate-
agendas is to facilitate the awareness of society to the fact that
not only do NO FACTS even *exist* that support the loathsome
agendas of those who seek to have girls and women FORCED to
gestate UNwanted pregnancies to term against their will, at the
expense of their long-term well-being and countless future oppor-
tunites. And to expose the speciousness of the agenda that
seeks to continue the hateful exclusion of same-sex couples from
marriage. Even though there is NO valid reason for doing so, and
despite the fact that there is NO way that fully-legal same-sex
marriage could ever adversely affect the marriages of any oppo-
site sex couples' marriages or society.
Those agendas are based on scare tactics and bald-faced LIES
that most people of average-and-above intelligence would see
through in a nanosecond.
Most of the people who lend any credence to those hateful
agendas fall into one or the other of two categories. Either (1)
they are uninformed with regard to abortion, marriage equality,
or both, or (2) they actively promote those agendas.
People in Category 2 are almost always people of low intellect
who have been CONNED into actually believing that those spec-
ious and sociopathic agendas actually have redeeming social
value and need to be supported. The good news is that SOME
of them can be brought to the realization of the fact that they
*were* conned. The bad news is that MOST of them have be-
come SO steeped in the propagandistic lies that teaching pigs to
sing would stand a strong likelihood of success.
So the weapon that egalitarians wield against the hate-agen-
das in Operation Consciousness-Raising is the help the ignorant
proponents of those agendas help to destroy them. We do that
by seizing on the vocal or written pronouncements and shine a
nice, bright spotlight of TRUTH on them. The *more* that people
see that the bigots actually almost ALL oar dolts whose "argu-
ments" are so vacuous as to be ludicrous. With the result that
the component of society in Category 1, above (and there are
tens of millions of them) can regularly SEE that those agendas
are something that NO *reasonable* person would touch with a
50-foot pole. And as more and more people realize that, society
moves steadily close to it will subject the bigots' agendas to the
same dramatic REJECTION that it imposed on the equally hateful
and moronic agendas of the segregationists, decades earlier.
So THANKS for this demonstration of your ignorance. It was
a valuable contribution to helping your worthless agendas to
come to an END.
Keep up the good work!!
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
��� Rest in Peace ���
��� George Richard Tiller, MD ���
��� August 8, 1941 � May 31, 2009 ���
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
-- Craig Chilton <xana...@mchsi.com>
www.LayoffRemedy.com -- Unemployment Solution!
www.ChristianEgalitarian.com -- Fight the RRR Cult!
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Tactics: Defending Human Rights
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Exposing RRR Bigotry
www.shadowandillusion.com -- Learn "The LOPAQUA Secret!"
www.TravelForPay.org -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL!
--sexkitten--
People outside the notoriously homophobic communities (you know the
ones, they are led by people like Mark Sanford and John Ensign) are
notorious for not giving a damn who other people sleep with.
The whole thread is a non-issue.
K
> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> George Orwell <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>>>> http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
>>>> .virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>>>>
>>>> GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
>>>> HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>>> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
>> No. Queer romantic relationships are notoriously unstable,
>
> 50% of all hetersexual MARRIAGES end in divorce. The average number
> of sexual partners for heterosexuals is around half a dozen.
"Gay author Gabriel Rotello notes the perspective of many gays that "Gay
liberation was founded . . . on a 'sexual brotherhood of promiscuity,'
and any abandonment of that promiscuity would amount to a 'communal
betrayal of gargantuan proportions.'" Rotello's perception of gay
promiscuity, which he criticizes, is consistent with survey results. A
far-ranging study of homosexual men published in 1978 revealed that 75
percent of self-identified, white, gay men admitted to having sex with
more than 100 different males in their lifetime: 15 percent claimed
100-249 sex partners; 17 percent claimed 250- 499; 15 percent claimed
500-999; and 28 percent claimed more than 1,000 lifetime male sex
partners..."
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_average_number_of_sex_partners_a_gay_man_has_in_a_lifetime
No contest: queers are far more unstable and promiscuous, and they
generally can't form lasting relationships.
K
"Gay author Gabriel Rotello notes the perspective of many gays that "Gay
Ray Fischer
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> George Orwell <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>>>>> http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
>>>>> .virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>>>>>
>>>>> GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
>>>>> HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>>>> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
>>> No. Queer romantic relationships are notoriously unstable,
>>
>> 50% of all hetersexual MARRIAGES end in divorce. The average number
>> of sexual partners for heterosexuals is around half a dozen.
>
>"Gay author Gabriel Rotello notes the perspective of many gays that "Gay
>liberation was founded . . . on a 'sexual brotherhood of promiscuity,'
Not interested in personal opinions. Facts count. Not bigots.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
K
It wasn't an opinion, it was the results of a survey, which you
fearfully snipped. Here, let's look again:
A far-ranging study of homosexual men published in 1978 revealed that 75
percent of self-identified, white, gay men admitted to having sex with
more than 100 different males in their lifetime: 15 percent claimed
100-249 sex partners; 17 percent claimed 250- 499; 15 percent claimed
500-999; and 28 percent claimed more than 1,000 lifetime male sex
partners..."
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_average_number_of_sex_partners_a_gay_man_has_in_a_lifetime
No doubt about it: queers are much more promiscuous than heterosexuals,
and the idea the can readily remain in committed relationships is, of
course, a myth.
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? <www.LayoffRemedy.com> ��
Ray Fischer
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>> George Orwell <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>>>>>>> http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
>>>>>>> .virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
>>>>>>> HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>>>>>> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
>>>>> No. Queer romantic relationships are notoriously unstable,
>>>> 50% of all hetersexual MARRIAGES end in divorce. The average number
>>>> of sexual partners for heterosexuals is around half a dozen.
>>> "Gay author Gabriel Rotello notes the perspective of many gays that "Gay
>>> liberation was founded . . . on a 'sexual brotherhood of promiscuity,'
>>
>> Not interested in personal opinions.
>
>It wasn't an opinion, it was the results of a survey,
What "survey" is that? I notice that you don't say.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
No One
He said enough - a "far ranging study of homosexual men published in
1978." The data would have had to have been collected earlier,
possibly several years earlier given typical publication delays. With
a much higher percentage forced to be closeted (losing a job or being
thrown out of housing was a real possibility in the past), it is very
difficult to get a representative sample. At that time, however, it
was very easy to get a non-representative sample: you could go to a
major city and just hand out questionaires to people going in or
coming out of the bathhouses.
There's also a possibilty of a higher level of promiscuity at that
time as a reaction to sexual repression being lifted. I'm not sure
what data there is to justify that, but it seems to be a common
belief that fits some individuals' personal experiences.
K
> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>> George Orwell <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>>>>>>>> http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
>>>>>>>> .virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
>>>>>>>> HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>>>>>>> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
>>>>>> No. Queer romantic relationships are notoriously unstable,
>>>>> 50% of all hetersexual MARRIAGES end in divorce. The average number
>>>>> of sexual partners for heterosexuals is around half a dozen.
>>>> "Gay author Gabriel Rotello notes the perspective of many gays that "Gay
>>>> liberation was founded . . . on a 'sexual brotherhood of promiscuity,'
>>> Not interested in personal opinions.
>>
>> A far-ranging study of homosexual men published in 1978 revealed that 75 percent of self-identified, white, gay men admitted to having sex with more than 100 different males in their lifetime: 15 percent claimed 100-249 sex partners; 17 percent claimed 250- 499; 15 percent claimed 500-999; and 28 percent claimed more than 1,000 lifetime male sex partners..."
>>
>> http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_average_number_of_sex_partners_a_gay_man_has_in_a_lifetime
>>
>> No doubt about it: queers are much more promiscuous than heterosexuals, and the idea the can readily remain in committed relationships is, of course, a myth.
>
Noted.
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? <www.LayoffRemedy.com> ��
Bill Taylor <nob...@nymu.eu> wrote:
Bigots, Neocons, and RRR Cultists -- all...
> ... leaves on the same tree of ignorance.
--sexkitten--
>
> No contest: queers are far more unstable and promiscuous, and they
> generally can't form lasting relationships.
Apparently you failed to read the post you just responded to. I can
dumb it down for you if you're having difficulty.
Ray Fischer
So not only are you a rabid bigot, you're also a lying asshole.
Typical. You have no facts. YOu have only hate.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? <www.LayoffRemedy.com> ��
MORONIC BIGOT, Bill Taylor <nob...@nymu.eu> wrote:
> (�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed?
>> Bigots, Neocons, and RRR Cultists -- all...
>>> ... leaves on the same tree of ignorance.
> You're a loser, Chilton.
Not in the least. Egalitarians who have all of the relevant
FACTS on THEIR side, and can marshall and present them well --
as I do -- always are WINNERS. In the end, we ALWAYS
drive bigoted agendas into the Drain of Extinction.
LOSERS are hateful and ignorant bigots like you, whose
hate-agendas are supported by NO facts (because NO such
facts even EXIST), and whose opposition to HARMLESS and
BENEFICIAL personal liberties makes them ludicrous laughing-
stocks.
As I've already pointed out elsewhere --
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The way to determine if a person is a bigot is very EASY.
(1) Does he DEFEND across-the-board EQUAL rights for ALL
people? If so, he's a sensible, fair-minded, compassionate,
and intelligent EGALITARIAN.
(2) Does he seek to DENY access to ANY personal liberties to
ANY group of people that the rest of society has ready
access to? If so, he's a hateful, loathsome, and ignorant
BIGOT.
I am happy to be (1). You, very SADLY, are (2).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sam Spade
Sam Spade
�� wrote:
>
>
> Yep. And one thing is for sure: No one will ever see an
> INTELLIGENT homophobe. Bigotry and IGNORANCE go together.
>
>
That's the cock suckers' party line.
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? <www.LayoffRemedy.com> ��
"Sam Spade" <s...@coldmail.com> wrote:
...NOTHING truthful or intelligent. A typical bigoted MORON.
= = = = = = =
Previous post follows:
On 04 Jul 2009 18:15:55 GMT,
Ray Fischer <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote:
> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> MORONIC BIGOT, BILL TAYLOR
>>> (aka "George Orwell") <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>>>> http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv.
>>>> virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>>>>
>>>> German sexologist says committed monogamous homosexual
>>>> relationships are a myth.
>>> Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
>> No. [Gay] romantic relationships are notoriously unstable...
> 50% of all hetersexual MARRIAGES end in divorce. The average
> number of sexual partners for heterosexuals is around half a dozen.
> That's hardly indicative of stable relationships.
>
> Looks like you're just a dumbshit homophobe.
Yep. And one thing is for sure: No one will ever see an
INTELLIGENT homophobe. Bigotry and IGNORANCE go together.
And Taylor is one of the MOST ignorant of them. And just
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? <www.LayoffRemedy.com> ��
"Sam Spade" <s...@coldmail.com> wrote:
> Ray Fischer wrote:
[ ... ]
>> 50% of all hetersexual MARRIAGES end in divorce. The average
>> numberof sexual partners for heterosexuals is around half a dozen.
>> That's hardly indicative of stable relationships.
>>
>> Looks like you're just a dumbshit homophobe.
> And, what is wrong with being a homophobe?
Nothing -- if you get off on being properly regarded as
a bigoted RETARD.
Dano
>>
> And, what is wrong with being a homophobe?
What are you afraid of? Studies show that upwards of 84% of all homophobes
are closeted gays. Many of whom go on to be murderers and suicides.
Everyone "knows" that. So I suppose it's good to fear that.
Do German "sexologists" piss on their patients during couselling sessions?
Dano
>
>>
>>
>> Yep. And one thing is for sure: No one will ever see an
>> INTELLIGENT homophobe. Bigotry and IGNORANCE go together.
>>
>>
> That's the cock suckers' party line.
You really are a sorry individual. So much self loathing.
K
Neither.
It is a fact that queers cannot sustain stable monogamous relationships.
What's it to you, though? You like to rape young girls, not young boys.
Wilson Woods
�� wrote:
>>> Bill Taylor <nob...@nymu.eu> wrote:
>
>
>>> Bigots, Neocons, and RRR Cultists -- all...
>
>>>> ... leaves on the same tree of ignorance.
>
>> You're a loser, Chilton.
>
> Not in the least. Egalitarians
You're a *fake* egalitarian.
K
> Sam Spade wrote:
>> And, what is wrong with being a homophobe?
>
> What are you afraid of? Studies show that upwards of 84% of all homophobes
> are closeted gays.
False. You're just one more trying to play The Queer Game. It's just a
game.
Wilson Woods
> In article <82j155t7l705q8hav...@4ax.com>
> "(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed?
>
> It's not against the law to dislike the personal conduct of
> people.
But the queers would sure like to make it that way.
Make no mistake: the queer agenda is about compelling people to think
well of queers, *for* their being queers. I know a couple of overt
queers, and I think well enough of them as neighbors and citizens. But
the queer agenda says I must think well of them for being queers. I
refuse. I'm indifferent to their sex lives; they can do what they want
so long as they don't do it in the street and frighten the horses. But
I don't like their flamboyant queen demeanor, and I'm not under any
obligation to like it. So I don't, and I won't.
Ray Fischer
You deleted my words and then lied about what I had written.
That makes you both a liar and a coward, just lke bullies and bigots
throughout history.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? <www.LayoffRemedy.com> ��
Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote...
...NOTHING truthful or intelligent. As usual.
<lying garbage flushed>
Previous post follows:
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
On Sun, 5 Jul 2009 06:40:26 +0100 (BST),
MORONIC BIGOT, Bill Taylor <nob...@nymu.eu> wrote:
> (�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed?
> <www.LayoffRemedy.com> �� <xana...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>> Bill Taylor <nob...@nymu.eu> wrote:
>> Bigots, Neocons, and RRR Cultists -- all...
>>> ... leaves on the same tree of ignorance.
> You're a loser, Chilton.
Not in the least. Egalitarians who have all of the relevant
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? <www.LayoffRemedy.com> ��
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? <www.LayoffRemedy.com> ��
> (�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed?
> <www.LayoffRemedy.com> �� <xana...@mchsi.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
> Who determines "proper?"
Sensible and intelligent people who VALUE personal liberties
and human/civil rights. (The OPPOSITE of LOSERS like you.)
> It's not against the law to dislike the personal conduct of
> people.
Right. NOR is it against the law to LAUGH at losers who are
STUPID enough to give a flying rat's ass about what OTHER people
do in private.
And sociopathic bigots like you are FAST becoming America's
National Laughingstock.
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? <www.LayoffRemedy.com> ��
Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Make no mistake: the [gay] agenda is...
...NONEXISTENT, except in the warped minds of hateful and
bone-ignorant bigoted losers like you.
This is Civil Rights Movement II -- and ALL that the gays seek
is the SAME that the blacks sought in Civil Rights Movement I:
The END of mindless and hateful discrimination over a TRIVIAL
variation of NORMALCY. And full access, across-the-board, to
EQUAL rights with everyone else -- including the right to marry
their partner of choice, regardless of the triviality of gender
composition.
> I know a couple of overt [gays], and I think well enough of
> them as neighbors and citizens.
But NOT well enough to seek to END *all* discrimination against
them -- right, HYPOCRITE?
> But the [gay] agenda says I must think well of them for being
> queers.
Wrong. Again, they have NO "agenda." And they couldn't
care LESS what bigots think of them as long as those bigots have
NO capability (or make no attempts) to discriminate against them,
or deprive them of EQUAL rights.
Take ME, for example. Even though I'm not gay. I **AM**
an egalitarian who constantly *exposes* the STUPIDITY of
bigots in Usenet and elsewhere. Thus, they loathe me. Do
you think that bothers me in the LEAST? Not at all! Not only
do i not give a flying rat's ass that they dislike me, but I am
quite HAPPY that they do -- since I want NOTHING to do with
being anything like them. I would be very disappointed if
they agreed with me on anything. Because then I'd have to
figure I wasn't doing my job as an egalitarian WELL enough.
The MORE the bigots loathe me, the HAPPIER I am!!
> I'm indifferent to their sex lives; they can do what they want
> so long as they don't do it in the street and frighten the horses.
> But I don't like their flamboyant queen demeanor, and I'm not
> under any obligation to like it. So I don't, and I won't.
CLUE: The only time I'd ever be likely to see such anomalous
flamboyance would be if were to make the effort to be a spec-
tator at a gay pride parade... where the more cinematic-minded
of them (not the AVERAGE ones) get together to have fun. If
you don't like that -- DON'T go to the parades. It's that simple.
K
> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>
>>>>> [Ray Fischer concedes defeat]
>>>> Noted.
>>> So not only are you a rabid bigot, you're also a lying asshole.
>> Neither.
>
> You deleted my words
They were crap.
It really isn't in doubt, is it? Queers are wildly, almost
inconceivably promiscuous, and they are unable to sustain stable
monogamous relationships.
Wilson Woods
>> Make no mistake: the queer agenda is...
>
> ...NONEXISTENT,
No. The queer agenda is about compelling people to think well of
queers, *for* their being queers. I know a couple of overt queers, and
I think well enough of them as neighbors and citizens. But the queer
agenda says I must think well of them for being queers. I refuse. I'm
Ray Fischer
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>
>>>>>> [Ray Fischer concedes defeat]
>>>>> Noted.
>>>> So not only are you a rabid bigot, you're also a lying asshole.
>>> Neither.
>>
>> You deleted my words
>
>They were crap.
You're a liar and a coward.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Wilson Woods
> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>> [Ray Fischer concedes defeat]
>>>>>> Noted.
>>>>> So not only are you a rabid bigot, you're also a lying asshole.
>>>> Neither.
>>> You deleted my words
>> They were crap.
>
> You're a liar and a coward.
Neither.
You're a rapist.
--sexkitten--
> Ray Fischer wrote:
> >> Ray Fischer wrote:
> >>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>
> >>>>> [Ray Fischer concedes defeat]
> >>>> Noted.
> >>> So not only are you a rabid bigot, you're also a lying asshole.
> >> Neither.
>
> > You deleted my words
>
> They were crap.
>
> It really isn't in doubt, is it? Queers are wildly, almost
> inconceivably promiscuous, and they are unable to sustain stable
> monogamous relationships.
Kinda like Promise Keepers.
And once again: outside the homophobe community, no one actually gives
a damn.
K
> On Jul 4, 1:45 pm, K <Kvisi...@live.con> wrote:
>> --slut-- wrote:
>>> On Jul 3, 9:21 am, K <Kvisi...@live.con> wrote:
>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>> http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
>>>>>> GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
>>>>>> HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>>>> than heterosexual ones.
>>> People outside the notoriously homophobic communities (you know the
>>> ones, they are led by people like Mark Sanford and John Ensign) are
>>> notorious for not giving a damn who other people sleep with.
>>> The whole thread is a non-issue.
>> "Gay author Gabriel Rotello notes the perspective of many gays that "Gay
>> liberation was founded . . . on a 'sexual brotherhood of promiscuity,'
>> betrayal of gargantuan proportions.'" Rotello's perception of gay
>> promiscuity, which he criticizes, is consistent with survey results. A
>> far-ranging study of homosexual men published in 1978 revealed that 75
>> percent of self-identified, white, gay men admitted to having sex with
>> more than 100 different males in their lifetime: 15 percent claimed
>> 100-249 sex partners; 17 percent claimed 250- 499; 15 percent claimed
>> 500-999; and 28 percent claimed more than 1,000 lifetime male sex
>> partners..."
>>
>>
>> No contest: queers are far more unstable and promiscuous, and they
>> generally can't form lasting relationships.
>
> Apparently you failed to read the post you just responded to.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_average_number_of_sex_partners_a_gay_man_has_in_a_lifetime
Queers are promiscuous, and unable to sustain monogamous stable
relationships.
Wilson Woods
> On Jul 5, 2:03 pm, K <Kvisi...@live.con> wrote:
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> K <Kvisi...@live.con> wrote:
>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>> K <Kvisi...@live.con> wrote:
>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>> [Ray Fischer concedes defeat]
>>>>>> Noted.
>>>>> So not only are you a rabid bigot, you're also a lying asshole.
>>>> Neither.
>>> You deleted my words
>> They were crap.
>>
>> It really isn't in doubt, is it? Queers are wildly, almost
>> inconceivably promiscuous, and they are unable to sustain stable
>> monogamous relationships.
>
> Kinda like
Kinda like, they just can't keep their flies zipped.
--sexkitten--
>
> Queers are promiscuous, and unable to sustain monogamous stable
> relationships.
No one, except you, cares.
Jealous?
K
Sure people care. Little ray fischer cares. You care, too - you
started out arguing.
--sexkitten--
I'm not arguing, I'm picking on you. You're playing into it nicely.
I do this for amusement when I'm bored. Usenet has no shortage of
stupid people to laugh at. That's why I come here. Now I have you,
homophobic and painfully jealous of the sex lives of others, and it's
giving me a few minutes amusement before we go barbecue.
Ray, btw, is also picking on you.
Next time don't make yourself such a target. :)
K
You're right, but not for lack of trying.
Father Haskell
> Ray Fischer wrote:
> > George Orwell <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
> >>http://listserv.virtueonline.org/pipermail/virtueonline_listserv
> >> .virtueonline.org/1999-January/000099.html
>
> >> GERMAN SEXOLOGIST SAYS COMMITTED MONOGAMOUS
> >> HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE A MYTH
>
> > Just as much true of heterosexual monogamous relationships.
>
> No. Queer romantic relationships are notoriously unstable, far more so
> than heterosexual ones.
No proof then that J. Edgar Hoover and Clyde Tolson
share the same grave.
Ray Fischer
--sexkitten--
HAHA! Until I opened up the quoted text I thought that was a response
to my comment on your jealousy of other people's sex lives. Come to
that, it probably is.
See? Entertainment. Goes well with marinated tri-tip and pinot noir.
You DO realize that snipping the text does you no good when it's in
the post right above you?
RamRod Sword of Baal
"K" <Kvis...@live.con> wrote in message
news:-8SdnRkiKIaKvszX...@earthlink.com...
RamRod Sword of Baal
"K" <Kvis...@live.con> wrote in message
news:-8SdnRkiKIaKvszX...@earthlink.com...
You bigots are a laugh a minute, it was YOU lot that had laws against gay
sex introduced and they were only removed in the USA in June 26, 2003, and
now you are saying that Gays cannot form long term stable relationships.
That was only 6 years ago.
So you forced them into a situation by refusing them a normal (for them)
situation where they could meet someone marry them and settle down,. It is
you lot that are fighting tooth and nail to try and stop gay Marriage and
now you scream that they are promiscuous, you expect change in 6 years., and
yet have fought every type of change that would help bring about marriage
between Gay people
The other thing is that heterosexuals would be just as promiscuous as anyone
else given half a chance.
Much of the conversation between heterosexual me revolves around sex.
The average young heterosexual males are out to get as much sex as they can
and it is not the homosexuals fault that these horny young guys cannot get
enough to satisfy them.
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? <www.LayoffRemedy.com> ��
Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Make no mistake: the [gay] agenda is...
...NONEXISTENT, except in the warped minds of hateful and
bone-ignorant bigoted losers like you.
This is Civil Rights Movement II -- and ALL that the gays seek
is the SAME that the blacks sought in Civil Rights Movement I:
The END of mindless and hateful discrimination over a TRIVIAL
variation of NORMALCY. And full access, across-the-board, to
EQUAL rights with everyone else -- including the right to marry
their partner of choice, regardless of the triviality of gender
composition.
> I know a couple of overt [gays], and I think well enough of
> them as neighbors and citizens.
But NOT well enough to seek to END *all* discrimination against
them -- right, HYPOCRITE?
> But the [gay] agenda says I must think well of them for being
> queers.
Wrong. Again, they have NO "agenda." And they couldn't
care LESS what bigots think of them as long as those bigots have
NO capability (or make no attempts) to discriminate against them,
or deprive them of EQUAL rights.
Take ME, for example. Even though I'm not gay. I **AM**
an egalitarian who constantly *exposes* the STUPIDITY of
bigots in Usenet and elsewhere. Thus, they loathe me. Do
you think that bothers me in the LEAST? Not at all! Not only
do i not give a flying rat's ass that they dislike me, but I am
quite HAPPY that they do -- since I want NOTHING to do with
being anything like them. I would be very disappointed if
they agreed with me on anything. Because then I'd have to
figure I wasn't doing my job as an egalitarian WELL enough.
The MORE the bigots loathe me, the HAPPIER I am!!
> I'm indifferent to their sex lives; they can do what they want
> so long as they don't do it in the street and frighten the horses.
> But I don't like their flamboyant queen demeanor, and I'm not
> under any obligation to like it. So I don't, and I won't.
CLUE: The only time I'd ever be likely to see such anomalous
K
No, *you* care, little ray.
Wilson Woods
No, seriously - you really aren't making an argument, but it's obvious
you're trying your hardest. Better luck next time.
K
I'm not a bigot.
You fucked up the first time, didn't you, twat? You wanted to reply,
but you fucked up and hit Send without writing anything. You're a
lifelong fuckup, aren't you? Yes.
Wilson Woods
�� wrote:
You didn't add anything, faggot. Oh, wait - you can't.
Wilson Woods
> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>> K <Kvis...@live.con> wrote:
>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>> [Ray Fischer concedes defeat]
>>>>>> Noted.
>>>>> So not only are you a rabid bigot, you're also a lying asshole.
>>>> Neither.
>>> You deleted my words
>> They were crap.
>
> You're a liar and a coward.
No.
Your words were crap - incoherent crap.
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? <www.LayoffRemedy.com> ��
Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com> ...
... as USUAL, had NOTING truthful or intelligent to say.
So as usual, I'm repeating the post he was unable to
refute ANY of:
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =
On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 11:39:20 -0700,
Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Make no mistake: the [gay] agenda is...
...NONEXISTENT, except in the warped minds of hateful and
bone-ignorant bigoted losers like you.
This is Civil Rights Movement II -- and ALL that the gays seek
is the SAME that the blacks sought in Civil Rights Movement I:
The END of mindless and hateful discrimination over a TRIVIAL
variation of NORMALCY. And full access, across-the-board, to
EQUAL rights with everyone else -- including the right to marry
their partner of choice, regardless of the triviality of gender
composition.
> I know a couple of overt [gays], and I think well enough of
> them as neighbors and citizens.
But NOT well enough to seek to END *all* discrimination against
them -- right, HYPOCRITE?
> But the [gay] agenda says I must think well of them for being
> queers.
Wrong. Again, they have NO "agenda." And they couldn't
care LESS what bigots think of them as long as those bigots have
NO capability (or make no attempts) to discriminate against them,
or deprive them of EQUAL rights.
Take ME, for example. Even though I'm not gay. I **AM**
an egalitarian who constantly *exposes* the STUPIDITY of
bigots in Usenet and elsewhere. Thus, they loathe me. Do
you think that bothers me in the LEAST? Not at all! Not only
do i not give a flying rat's ass that they dislike me, but I am
quite HAPPY that they do -- since I want NOTHING to do with
being anything like them. I would be very disappointed if
they agreed with me on anything. Because then I'd have to
figure I wasn't doing my job as an egalitarian WELL enough.
The MORE the bigots loathe me, the HAPPIER I am!!
> I'm indifferent to their sex lives; they can do what they want
> so long as they don't do it in the street and frighten the horses.
> But I don't like their flamboyant queen demeanor, and I'm not
> under any obligation to like it. So I don't, and I won't.
CLUE: The only time I'd ever be likely to see such anomalous
Wilson Woods
�� wrote:
>> I know a couple of overt queers, and I think well enough of
>> them as neighbors and citizens.
>
> But NOT well enough
Plenty well enough, faggot.
>> But the queer agenda says I must think well of them for being
>> queers.
>
> Wrong.
No, *right*, queer.
> Take ME, for example. Even though I'm not gay.
You're as gay as a fucking goose, chilton, HIV-oozing bitch.
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? <www.LayoffRemedy.com> ��
Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com> ...
... as USUAL, had NOTING truthful or intelligent to say.
So as usual, I'm repeating the post he was unable to
refute ANY of:
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =
On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 11:39:20 -0700,
Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Make no mistake: the [gay] agenda is...
...NONEXISTENT, except in the warped minds of hateful and
bone-ignorant bigoted losers like you.
This is Civil Rights Movement II -- and ALL that the gays seek
is the SAME that the blacks sought in Civil Rights Movement I:
The END of mindless and hateful discrimination over a TRIVIAL
variation of NORMALCY. And full access, across-the-board, to
EQUAL rights with everyone else -- including the right to marry
their partner of choice, regardless of the triviality of gender
composition.
> I know a couple of overt [gays], and I think well enough of
> them as neighbors and citizens.
But NOT well enough to seek to END *all* discrimination against
them -- right, HYPOCRITE?
> But the [gay] agenda says I must think well of them for being
> queers.
Wrong. Again, they have NO "agenda." And they couldn't
Wilson Woods
�� wrote:
>
> [faggot chilton bullshit snipped]
>
>> I know a couple of overt [gays], and I think well enough of
>> them as neighbors and citizens.
>
> But NOT well enough
Plenty well enough. Their extravagant, outrageous queer schtick is
nauseating.
>
>> But the queer agenda says I must think well of them for being
>> queers.
>
> Wrong.
No, right, queer.
> Take ME, for example. Even though I'm not gay.
Queer. You scream "fuck me up the coal chute". I won't do it, but
that's what you scream you want someone to do.
Wilson Woods
�� wrote:
>
> [faggot chilton bullshit snipped]
>
>> I know a couple of overt queers, and I think well enough of
>
> But NOT well enough
Plenty well enough. Their extravagant, outrageous queer schtick is
nauseating.
>
>> But the queer agenda says I must think well of them for being
>> queers.
>
> Wrong.
No, right, queer.
> Take ME, for example. Even though I'm not gay.
Queer. You scream "fuck me up the coal chute". I won't do it, but
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) �� WHY be Unemployed? <www.LayoffRemedy.com> ��
Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> You're as gay as...
(1) You're wrong. We who are STRAIGHT *allies*
of the gays in Civil Rights Movement II outnumber
the gays, themselves, by a ratio of 9-to-1.
UNLIKE bigots, we are fair-minded, sensible,
and intelligent people. All BIGOTS are DOLTS.
(2) There nothing much more IGNORANT than a
bigoted loser who is actually STUPID enough to
spend so much as a nanosecond giving a flying
rat's ass about such TRIVIALITES as OTHER
people's sexual orientations, or with whom they
happen to have sex in private. That's one of the
world's *best* ways for a person to PROVE that
he's a complete IDIOT. (Congratulations! You
succeeded in just making such a public MORON
of yourself!)
-- (�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) <xana...@mchsi.com>
www.LayoffRemedy.com -- Unemployment Solution!
www.ChristianEgalitarian.com -- Fight the RRR Cult!
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Tactics: Defending Human Rights
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Exposing RRR Bigotry
www.shadowandillusion.com -- Learn "The LOPAQUA Secret!"
www.TravelForPay.org -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL!
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
To the doltish homophobic bigots who are too
DUMB to realize that 90% of all who support
EQUAL rights for Gays are ALLIED egalitarians
who are STRAIGHT ---
FEEL FREE
to think I'm gay,
if that's what rings yer bell.
That would bother me precisely as much as it would if you thought
I were left-handed.
And I'm not either one.
Handedness, sexual orientation, race, and eye color are all
merely TRIVIAL variations of NORMALCY.
Ignorance knows no bounds, and homophobes are the PROOF.
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Wilson Woods
�� wrote:
>
> (1) You're wrong.
No, I'm *RIGHT*.
K
Homosexual males only (2294 responses)
104 or 4.5% had 0 same-sex partners in their lifetime
79 or 3.4% had only 1 same-sex partner
330 or 14.4% had 2-5 same-sex partners
264 or 11.5% had 6-10 same-sex partners
306 or 13.3% had 11-20 same-sex partners
399 or 17.4% had 21-50 same-sex partners
288 or 12.6% had 51-100 same-sex partners
276 or 12.0% had 101-300 same-sex partners
248 or 10.8% had more than 300 same-sex partners
http://americansfortruth.com/health-science/promiscuity-among-homosexuals.html
So, 60.8% had 21 partners or more.
Conclusion: wildly, wantonly promiscuous, and unable to from stable
monogamous relationships.
Noe one really doubts this, of course, including the queers themselves.
K
Homosexual males only (2294 responses)
104 or 4.5% had 0 same-sex partners in their lifetime
79 or 3.4% had only 1 same-sex partner
330 or 14.4% had 2-5 same-sex partners
264 or 11.5% had 6-10 same-sex partners
306 or 13.3% had 11-20 same-sex partners
399 or 17.4% had 21-50 same-sex partners
288 or 12.6% had 51-100 same-sex partners
276 or 12.0% had 101-300 same-sex partners
248 or 10.8% had more than 300 same-sex partners
http://americansfortruth.com/health-science/promiscuity-among-homosexuals.html
So, 60.8% had 21 partners or more.
Conclusion: wildly, wantonly promiscuous, and unable to form stable
monogamous relationships.
No one really doubts this, of course, including the queers themselves.