Org Mobile Site
Originally Posted by Fragony:
Firstly because they are 11, if you tell them they are borderline they will also believe it. If these kids are gay they will eventually be sure of that, but not at the age of 11. It's not a stage that is provided for them here, they are pushed into a certain direction, and lets not forget the sexually explicite nature of these gay-parade events.
Should I get started on the creepy sexually explicit input for example young girls get daily from the media ?Firstly because they are 11, if you tell them they are borderline they will also believe it. If these kids are gay they will eventually be sure of that, but not at the age of 11. It's not a stage that is provided for them here, they are pushed into a certain direction, and lets not forget the sexually explicite nature of these gay-parade events.
Originally Posted by Fragony:
(..) lets not forget the sexually explicite nature of these gay-parade events.
Have you watched MTV lately? Quite explicit, though only in a heterosexual way. Never, ever in a homosexual way.(..) lets not forget the sexually explicite nature of these gay-parade events.
Unthinkable!
I wouldn't let my 11 year old kids (if I had any) join the gay parade.
For that matter, I wouldn't let them visit a strip joint either.
If it's ok with the parents, I don't see any real problem.
For that matter, I wouldn't let them visit a strip joint either.
If it's ok with the parents, I don't see any real problem.
Originally Posted by Adrian II:
Have you watched MTV lately? Quite explicit, though only in a heterosexual way. Never, ever in a homosexual way.
Unthinkable!
As long as there are no lolita's there this isn't a very good comparison.Have you watched MTV lately? Quite explicit, though only in a heterosexual way. Never, ever in a homosexual way.
Unthinkable!
Originally Posted by Fragony:
As long as there are no lolita's there this isn't a very good comparison.
Do you quite understand what kinds of models and images are being fed to girls at an impressionable age here...? Or the effects thereof ?As long as there are no lolita's there this isn't a very good comparison.
Originally Posted by Watchman:
Do you quite understand what kinds of models and images are being fed to girls at an impressionable age here...? Or the effects thereof ?
I don't watch tv, but I don't see how it is relevant here, if these models and images being fed to girls at an impressionable age told them they were really boys in a girls body, only then it would have been.Do you quite understand what kinds of models and images are being fed to girls at an impressionable age here...? Or the effects thereof ?
I don't watch TV either. Don't even own one actually. But out on the street I see girls barely into their teens trying to pass themselves for Paris Hilton, and think "eghhhh". 
I've been told Britney Spears' dance moves also look pretty darn creepy when quite skillfully imitated by an eight-year-old girl beaming with quite innocent pride over her ability.
Get the point now ? Sociologists and other analysts don't use funny concepts like "oversexualized commercial culture" and "saturation of sexual imagery in media and everyday life" just because.
Giving kids hints of how to deal with their possibly divergent sexual orientation doesn't compare even remotely.
I've been told Britney Spears' dance moves also look pretty darn creepy when quite skillfully imitated by an eight-year-old girl beaming with quite innocent pride over her ability.
Get the point now ? Sociologists and other analysts don't use funny concepts like "oversexualized commercial culture" and "saturation of sexual imagery in media and everyday life" just because.
Giving kids hints of how to deal with their possibly divergent sexual orientation doesn't compare even remotely.
I see what you are saying and it belongs in a different thread. The people that are behind this thing do not inform these kids of their sexuality, they tell them what they are, when it can't be clear at this point what exactly they are. It is very much possible that these kids are gay, it could also very well be a stage, these people simply can't know, by allowing extremily young kids to events like this is nothing more then playing with their heads and forcing them into a direction.
And if that isn't "their direction", how long do you figure they're going to bother going that way ?
And besides, what do you think they actually gay kids have to go through growing up in a heteronormative society ? At least these days homosexuality isn't criminalized or defined as a psychiatric disorder in civilized countries anymore.
And besides, what do you think they actually gay kids have to go through growing up in a heteronormative society ? At least these days homosexuality isn't criminalized or defined as a psychiatric disorder in civilized countries anymore.
Yeah, I think the kids can figure it out for themselves. People brought up in the south still realize they are gay, and that has to be far more influential than a parade.
The gay parade is, of course, the best opportunity for prepubescent kids to explore their sexuality 
Good grief, can we cut the provincialism here? These parades are just a lot of fun. They are far more innocent than outsiders think, and they don't have the sort of sordid aftermath that you get after so-called 'healthy' public occasions. There are more drunken brawls and sexual assaults on any given night than after a gay parade.
Originally Posted by Watchman:
Your rank homophobia has been duly noted.
Personally I very much doubt if you can "make" someone to be gay, which seems to be what is being suggested here. Rather, if there's reason to assume the kids have homosexual leanings isn't it just a good thing to properly inform them about the ins and outs of it before they hit the really troublesome puberty stage ? The ones who then really do swing that way ought to then end up more comfortable with themselves, sparing the world a fair lot of unnecessary teen angst, whereas those whose ambivalency ultimately leans more on the "straight" side come off with a better understanding of the matter and otherwise go about their lives in the normal fashion.
But really, I'd like to have a bit more hard information to go by about this whole topic. What's this "boat" talk mean in practice anyway ? Who are these "they" who "know [these kids] are gay" ? The children themselves ? Their parents ? Child psychiatrists ? Who ?
The lack of any and all real data provided on what's this really all about and the relevant circumstances and actors has thus far been fairly complete, by what I can see. And I dunno about you, but I dislike fumbling around in the dark.
Watchman...you are the very definition of hard core leftist liberal. Your rank homophobia has been duly noted.
Personally I very much doubt if you can "make" someone to be gay, which seems to be what is being suggested here. Rather, if there's reason to assume the kids have homosexual leanings isn't it just a good thing to properly inform them about the ins and outs of it before they hit the really troublesome puberty stage ? The ones who then really do swing that way ought to then end up more comfortable with themselves, sparing the world a fair lot of unnecessary teen angst, whereas those whose ambivalency ultimately leans more on the "straight" side come off with a better understanding of the matter and otherwise go about their lives in the normal fashion.
But really, I'd like to have a bit more hard information to go by about this whole topic. What's this "boat" talk mean in practice anyway ? Who are these "they" who "know [these kids] are gay" ? The children themselves ? Their parents ? Child psychiatrists ? Who ?
The lack of any and all real data provided on what's this really all about and the relevant circumstances and actors has thus far been fairly complete, by what I can see. And I dunno about you, but I dislike fumbling around in the dark.
First of all, homophobia means fear of sodomites, I dear say that he is not afraid of them.
Second of all, kids don't need to learn that stuff. Popular culture likes to portray the "Dark Ages" and the US Wild West as a time of unequivical violence, oppression, and disorder. While all three were more promanent than they were in most times, our "enlightend" society today is a hundred times worse. In the "Wild West", remembered as probably the most corrupt, and violent time in U.S. and possibly world history, people never had to worry about the stuff that they do today. There were hardly any rape cases at all through the whole history of the Wild West (not even with prostitues). (The main reason for that is because when a family member of the victim and the whole community found out what happened, they would hunt down and kill the rapists: thus, hardly any rape.) While there was a lot of violence (similar in magnitude to today's gang wars), it was not dirrected toward the weak, old, young, or toward women in most cases. Also, it (Usually) was a lot more honorable than say, today's gang wars.
Why do we have it off so bad today? Why is our society more corrupt than it has ever been in the history of the world? A good answer: What we teach our children. They are the future of society, and what we teach them (and don't teach them) has the largest single factor on what society will be like. Why do kids need to know stuff like that? It isn't legal to do it till you are 16, so why get them thinking like that? If we want a noble, healthy, safe society we should teach our children noble, healthy, and safe things. It is not a question of gays, but of wether we should be exposing our kids to ANY sexual lifestyles! Not saying lock 'em up and never let 'em hear the word
, but why make a huge event of sex when they are not old enough to have sex? If you grow a kid up on sex, he will live for sex and all else will be a backround process. If you grow a kid up on good morals, than he/she will grow up as good citizens and sex can be a way of showing love/recreation, not life. When you train society to live for sex and violence, you breed rapists.Vuk, homophobia is now generally used to mean 'hatred of sodomites'. I know it's literally fear of, but that's not how it's used.
I'll support much of the rest of your post with a quote from Apocalypse Now:
"We train young men to drop fire on people, but their officers won't let them write **** on their planes because it's obscene!"
I'll support much of the rest of your post with a quote from Apocalypse Now:
"We train young men to drop fire on people, but their officers won't let them write **** on their planes because it's obscene!"
Originally Posted by :
It isn't legal to do it till you are 16, so why get them thinking like that? If we want a noble, healthy, safe society we should teach our children noble, healthy, and safe things. It is not a question of gays, but of wether we should be exposing our kids to ANY sexual lifestyles! Not saying lock 'em up and never let 'em hear the word, but why make a huge event of sex when they are not old enough to have sex?
When did you have sex education?It isn't legal to do it till you are 16, so why get them thinking like that? If we want a noble, healthy, safe society we should teach our children noble, healthy, and safe things. It is not a question of gays, but of wether we should be exposing our kids to ANY sexual lifestyles! Not saying lock 'em up and never let 'em hear the word
, but why make a huge event of sex when they are not old enough to have sex?Here in Holland it starts when you're about 13 years old
When did you start going out?
Here in Holland it starts when you're about 15 years old
What is the legal drinking age?
16
Did that stop me from drinking when I was 15?
No
I was 17 at some point, my girlfriend from back then was 16, does that make me a paedophil?
In theory yes, but seriously
Originally Posted by :
There were hardly any rape cases at all through the whole history of the Wild West (not even with prostitues). (The main reason for that is because when a family member of the victim and the whole community found out what happened, they would hunt down and kill the rapists: thus, hardly any rape.)
What a pile of manure Vuk .There were hardly any rape cases at all through the whole history of the Wild West (not even with prostitues). (The main reason for that is because when a family member of the victim and the whole community found out what happened, they would hunt down and kill the rapists: thus, hardly any rape.)
yeh everyone would hunt down the rapist and string them up because thats what would happen on the really rare occasion that something that occurs throughout history would dare to show up in the wild west .
Alternatively you could rape a prostitute , burn down the brothel and get away with it by getting your lawyer to say you were sleepwalking since a nice young man from a respectable family would never do such things if he was awake .
Originally Posted by :
As long as there are no lolita's there this isn't a very good comparison.
How old was that French girl who sang about a taxi driver ?As long as there are no lolita's there this isn't a very good comparison.
Originally Posted by Stig:
When did you have sex education?
Here in Holland it starts when you're about 13 years old
When did you start going out?
Here in Holland it starts when you're about 15 years old
What is the legal drinking age?
16
Did that stop me from drinking when I was 15?
No
I was 17 at some point, my girlfriend from back then was 16, does that make me a paedophil?
In theory yes, but seriously
When did you have sex education?
Here in Holland it starts when you're about 13 years old
When did you start going out?
Here in Holland it starts when you're about 15 years old
What is the legal drinking age?
16
Did that stop me from drinking when I was 15?
No
I was 17 at some point, my girlfriend from back then was 16, does that make me a paedophil?
In theory yes, but seriously
13 year old children shouldn't be getting sex ed. Innocent minds do not need that crap.
Originally Posted by Tribesman:
What a pile of manure Vuk .
yeh everyone would hunt down the rapist and string them up because thats what would happen on the really rare occasion that something that occurs throughout history would dare to show up in the wild west .
Alternatively you could rape a prostitute , burn down the brothel and get away with it by getting your lawyer to say you were sleepwalking since a nice young man from a respectable family would never do such things if he was awake .
How old was that French girl who sang about a taxi driver ?
What a pile of manure Vuk .
yeh everyone would hunt down the rapist and string them up because thats what would happen on the really rare occasion that something that occurs throughout history would dare to show up in the wild west .
Alternatively you could rape a prostitute , burn down the brothel and get away with it by getting your lawyer to say you were sleepwalking since a nice young man from a respectable family would never do such things if he was awake .
How old was that French girl who sang about a taxi driver ?
The type of responce I've come to expect from one such as youself Tribesman. Let that suffice.
Originally Posted by Orb:
Vuk, homophobia is now generally used to mean 'hatred of sodomites'. I know it's literally fear of, but that's not how it's used.
I'll support much of the rest of your post with a quote from Apocalypse Now:
"We train young men to drop fire on people, but their officers won't let them write **** on their planes because it's obscene!"
Just because others misuse the word, he should not.Vuk, homophobia is now generally used to mean 'hatred of sodomites'. I know it's literally fear of, but that's not how it's used.
I'll support much of the rest of your post with a quote from Apocalypse Now:
"We train young men to drop fire on people, but their officers won't let them write **** on their planes because it's obscene!"
Hydrophobia is used to refer to molecules having a chemical aversion to water. What makes you think homophobia has to refer to fear?
Originally Posted by Vuk:
13 year old children shouldn't be getting sex ed. Innocent minds do not need that crap.
Why is sex ed crap? Should everyone have to learn about sex entirely through trial and error (i.e. the school of hard knocks 13 year old children shouldn't be getting sex ed. Innocent minds do not need that crap.
)? If sex ed is of value, when should it be taught? After many kids have already started having sex? And I'd be very interested to hear some support for your claims about the wild west besides movies starring John Wayne.
Ajax
Originally Posted by :
The type of responce I've come to expect from one such as youself Tribesman. Let that suffice.
Interesting . You have learnt to expect tripe to be called tripe . CongratulationsThe type of responce I've come to expect from one such as youself Tribesman. Let that suffice.
So Vuk , like Ajax says have you any data that might just possibly suggest that your claim is not of the total nonsense variety ?
Originally Posted by :
13 year old children shouldn't be getting sex ed. Innocent minds do not need that crap.
Definately away with the fairies on that one .13 year old children shouldn't be getting sex ed. Innocent minds do not need that crap.
Unless of course you live in a strange world where puberty doesn't happen until you reach the legal age of majority .
As far as I know in the Ol' West rape was fairly common place, as there was plenty of hiding space for roaming Brigands and not enough manpower to have any decent sort of enforcement. Hell, even Law Enforcement would get in on the act sometimes, just because nobody could stop them. Thats why vigilantism became especially ubiquitous in Montana and such places, the Law was every bit as bad as the Criminal. A lot of innocent people probably died because of hear say, just so that an angry mob could be appeased. The Wild West was definantly not a friendly place in any respect to the word.
Originally Posted by :
13 year old children shouldn't be getting sex ed. Innocent minds do not need that crap.
Innocent at 13? We were already thinking of it when at primary school. Besides if I don't get sex ed before the sex itself how on earth am I to know that I should use a condom and all those sorts of things.13 year old children shouldn't be getting sex ed. Innocent minds do not need that crap.
When I was 11 I thought was gay because I had the hots for Whoopi Goldberg, then I found out she was a chic and was like "whew!"
Whoopi?
I think such a thing points more toward general psychosis than toward any particular sexual proclivity. Humm…and what might one think of sheep? Just a bad joke
As for sexed if we feel it is better for Jr. to find out in class than from the older guys no big deal. But what is the need to teach them about sexual practices that do not lead to reproduction?
If we take it farther than that then it is not education exactly but more political indoctrination. The child will make up his or her own mind much more clearly with out someone nudging them in a particular direction. People who say it is needed would to me have some sort of agenda.
I think such a thing points more toward general psychosis than toward any particular sexual proclivity. Humm…and what might one think of sheep? Just a bad joke
As for sexed if we feel it is better for Jr. to find out in class than from the older guys no big deal. But what is the need to teach them about sexual practices that do not lead to reproduction?
If we take it farther than that then it is not education exactly but more political indoctrination. The child will make up his or her own mind much more clearly with out someone nudging them in a particular direction. People who say it is needed would to me have some sort of agenda.
Originally Posted by Fragony:
This sick or what?
The best way to test your impartiality in this case (and your patience I believe) is to ask yourself the same question in the inverse situation. If your worries are not biased towards homophobia the answer should be clearer than water.This sick or what?
Just in case: the inverse situation would be a boat for straights.
Originally Posted by :
But what is the need to teach them about sexual practices that do not lead to reproduction?
Well I could go the simple route and mention contraception since the aim of that is to not lead to reproduction . But what is the need to teach them about sexual practices that do not lead to reproduction?
Instead I shall take the Slick Willie approach , a blow job isn't sex is it since the intern cannot get pregnant .
But of course I am well out of date on the issue of sex education nowadays , do they have lessons in oral stimulation ?
Back in my day it was simple . Sex is something that you will learn about when you are married , if not you will burn in hell .
Though of course in my opinion it was the bolloxes that would lock people up as mentally deficient if they had not followed the guidelines , use the offspring as slave abour or sell them on to the highest bidder who would burn in hell .
But hey you cannot beat them good old time values can you . Oh how I wish it was just like that today . Just like in the old old wild but not so wild and thouroughly moralistically upstanding west .
BTW Vuk any luck with finding 19th Century American sex crime figures yet ?
You might perhaps have come across the case I mentioned as an example .
Though of course theat would be too easy . perahps the debates on the abolishion of the death penalty for rape might give you an insight about " this horrible scurge that is sweeping our great nation and its territories" or "the abandonment of faith and morals in the west that is a great threat to the nation the churches and our Lords natural order" .
Or perhaps you knew you were talking tripe in the first place but just thought you would throw it in there for a laugh
Look, there are good and bad gay people, just like there are good and bad straight people.
As far as the converse, no, I don't think I would be particularly thrilled with my (hypothetical) eleven year old children of either gender participating in a sexually explicit parade of any sort. Like, say, Carnaval in Rio. No, no kiddies there, thank you.
As far as the converse, no, I don't think I would be particularly thrilled with my (hypothetical) eleven year old children of either gender participating in a sexually explicit parade of any sort. Like, say, Carnaval in Rio. No, no kiddies there, thank you.
Originally Posted by Del Arroyo:
gay people are basically guilty until proven innocent
"Guilty" of what?gay people are basically guilty until proven innocent
Originally Posted by Ser Clegane:
"Guilty" of what?
Used here as a metaphor. What I am saying is that for me gay people are more than normally untrustworthy."Guilty" of what?
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO