'Dark Side' of homosexual culture

[Gunny]

Said, would you still like me if I really didn't know?

I drive probably no more than two times a week. I take the subway into work and from work, and I can walk to the station.

Bet I wouldn't be too far off if I ventured a guess that you take that subway from Chantilly ......

 

[KarlMarx]

I don't read that article and feel like I am merely presented with facts. I read the article, and I see it leaning in favor of bashing homosexuals. Look at the website it's coming from--a VERY conservative website. Sorry, I personally don't give it much credence.

Baldwin says his research not only "confirms that homosexuals molest children at a rate vastly higher than heterosexuals," but it found that "the mainstream homosexual culture" even "commonly promotes sex with children."

Yeah, this article isn't about bashing homosexuals.

So it comes from a very conservative web site.... are liberals supposed to be the guardians of truth? You may fancy yourselves as such, but considering some of the grand slam stupid remarks from libs, I think you flatter yourselves.

So... what is so gay bashing about citing the fact that homosexual magazine advertise travel to countries where sex with children is wide spread? And the statement by the ACT-UP founder who stated that "intergenerational love" was healthy? He did, in fact, make that statement. If anyone is incriminating themselves, it's the gays.

Abbey Normal stated it correctly, if you don't agree with something, you automatically label it as "hate" instead of countering the arguments...

 

[Hagbard Celine]

So... what is so gay bashing about citing the fact that homosexual magazine advertise travel to countries where sex with children is wide spread? And the statement by the ACT-UP founder who stated that "intergenerational love" was healthy? He did, in fact, make that statement. If anyone is incriminating themselves, it's the gays.

Give me a break. Men's Journal and Esquire, two hetero-men's mags have advertisements in the back for vacations to Indonesia, South America, and Africa, is THAT evidence that hetersexual men are more inclined to have sex with children? Please spare me your bullsh*t.

As for "intergenerational love," hetero men and women date and marry men and women years their senior all the time. Look at Demi Moore and that kid from the 70s show or Jack Nicholson and that young model he's with. He's old enough to be her grandfather!

You're just afraid of homos because you think that if you come into contact with one, you'll become one. You're a coward.



Try putting up sources from a reputable news source instead of just biased, conservative blogs.

 

[elephant]

First, I really do not care who wins this debate, I just feel obligated to point out some flaws with this "study".

In reference to the Eugene Abel study, it was conducted twenty years ago on self-reporting "criminals". That is, the subjects may be interpreted to be "Nonincarcerated Pedophiliacs", after the fact, based on what they say to the doctors. The article is called "Self-Reported Sex Crimes of Nonincarcerated Pedophiliacs".

The follow up study is "The Self-Reported Behaviors of Juvenile Sexual Offenders". These are adolescents, self reporting about what they do with other juveniles.

Also, the first study is cited by every other author mentioned in the article. That is, every other author used this one article as their proof of homosexuals being more inclined to be pedophiles. So there seems to be only one study supporting all of this. It appears to be an easily repeatable study, but no has done it.

Finally, statistics is not a straightforward science. I would need to see the actual data and the methods used to generate these numbers to decide for myself if the study is believable, because from I was able to find and read there seems to a bias that makes me question the quality of the "science" used.

There is my two cents.

 

[MissileMan]

First, I really do not care who wins this debate, I just feel obligated to point out some flaws with this "study".

In reference to the Eugene Abel study, it was conducted twenty years ago on self-reporting "criminals". That is, the subjects may be interpreted to be "Nonincarcerated Pedophiliacs", after the fact, based on what they say to the doctors. The article is called "Self-Reported Sex Crimes of Nonincarcerated Pedophiliacs".

The follow up study is "The Self-Reported Behaviors of Juvenile Sexual Offenders". These are adolescents, self reporting about what they do with other juveniles.

Also, the first study is cited by every other author mentioned in the article. That is, every other author used this one article as their proof of homosexuals being more inclined to be pedophiles. So there seems to be only one study supporting all of this. It appears to be an easily repeatable study, but no has done it.

Finally, statistics is not a straightforward science. I would need to see the actual data and the methods used to generate these numbers to decide for myself if the study is believable, because from I was able to find and read there seems to a bias that makes me question the quality of the "science" used.

There is my two cents.

Hey man! Don't muddy the waters with thoughtful reasoning or analysis of the data...

Good post!

 

[Abbey Normal]

You're just afraid of homos because you think that if you come into contact with one, you'll become one. You're a coward.

Well, it looks like I spoke to soon, when I said the only ubiquitous lib accusation missing in this thread was that the article's authors (and their supporters) are homophobic. We now have the expected complete triumverate of PC name-calling whenever gays are discussed:

Haters and Bashers and Homophobes, oh my!

 

[manu1959]

Research purports to reveal 'Dark Side' of homosexual culture...Pedophilia more common among 'Gays'


see: www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?article_ID=27431

"Report: Pedophilia more common among 'gays'
Research purports to reveal 'dark side' of homosexual culture"

dark side huh....good to know that balls on chin and one up the arse is the bright side of their lives....explains a lot

 

[ProudDem]

Bet I wouldn't be too far off if I ventured a guess that you take that subway from Chantilly ......

There's no metro stop in Chantilly. But you're close.

 

[ProudDem]

First, I really do not care who wins this debate, I just feel obligated to point out some flaws with this "study".

In reference to the Eugene Abel study, it was conducted twenty years ago on self-reporting "criminals". That is, the subjects may be interpreted to be "Nonincarcerated Pedophiliacs", after the fact, based on what they say to the doctors. The article is called "Self-Reported Sex Crimes of Nonincarcerated Pedophiliacs".

The follow up study is "The Self-Reported Behaviors of Juvenile Sexual Offenders". These are adolescents, self reporting about what they do with other juveniles.

Also, the first study is cited by every other author mentioned in the article. That is, every other author used this one article as their proof of homosexuals being more inclined to be pedophiles. So there seems to be only one study supporting all of this. It appears to be an easily repeatable study, but no has done it.

Finally, statistics is not a straightforward science. I would need to see the actual data and the methods used to generate these numbers to decide for myself if the study is believable, because from I was able to find and read there seems to a bias that makes me question the quality of the "science" used.

There is my two cents.

Elephant, I agree with missile! Beautifully stated.

Karl, what is the big deal with my not wanting to give the article much probity? I posted an article by Frank Rich, which clearly leaned towards the left. He provided facts througout the article. Every single conservative who responded to that article attacked it, saying that the facts were incorrect. When I asked what facts, the ones they would site were indicative of their not understanding the meaning of the sentence.

We all get a sense of a message behind anything we read, which can be that the reporter/journalist is just providing facts. I am reading "All the President's Men." I have not spoken to one conservative that has said to me, "Great book." Rather, they attack it. Okaaaaaaaaaaaay.

Anyway, get over yourself.

 

[KarlMarx]

Give me a break. Men's Journal and Esquire, two hetero-men's mags have advertisements in the back for vacations to Indonesia, South America, and Africa, is THAT evidence that hetersexual men are more inclined to have sex with children? Please spare me your bullsh*t.

As for "intergenerational love," hetero men and women date and marry men and women years their senior all the time. Look at Demi Moore and that kid from the 70s show or Jack Nicholson and that young model he's with. He's old enough to be her grandfather!

You're just afraid of homos because you think that if you come into contact with one, you'll become one. You're a coward.



Try putting up sources from a reputable news source instead of just biased, conservative blogs.

There's a vast difference between a 60 year old that chases 25 year old women and a pervert that hangs around school yards....

I smirk at your definition of courage...... if participation in acts of sodomy were laudable, then most of San Francisco would be eligible for the Congressional Medal of Honor (or, should we come up with a new medal for this newfound brand of courage? How about "The Purple Butt"?)

Silly me.... I always thought that examples of real courage was planting the flag at Iwo Jima, marching to Selma and preserving the Union or, more relevant to the topic..... getting psychiatric help to understand and deal with same sex urges....

I think the real cowards are many gays, who are afraid if they really tried, they'd probably find that the real reason why they're gay is that they probably were abused in their child hood.

 

[KarlMarx]

Elephant, I agree with missile! Beautifully stated.

Karl, what is the big deal with my not wanting to give the article much probity? I posted an article by Frank Rich, which clearly leaned towards the left. He provided facts througout the article. Every single conservative who responded to that article attacked it, saying that the facts were incorrect. When I asked what facts, the ones they would site were indicative of their not understanding the meaning of the sentence.

We all get a sense of a message behind anything we read, which can be that the reporter/journalist is just providing facts. I am reading "All the President's Men." I have not spoken to one conservative that has said to me, "Great book." Rather, they attack it. Okaaaaaaaaaaaay.

Anyway, get over yourself.

Is this the article that you are referring to?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showpost.php?p=329550&postcount=1

Let's compare the two articles:

First sentence of the two articles

Frank Rich: ONCE Toto parts the curtain, the Wizard of Oz can never be the wizard again. He is forever Professor Marvel, blowhard and snake-oil salesman. Hurricane Katrina, which is likely to endure in the American psyche as long as L. Frank Baum's mythic tornado, has similarly unmasked George W. Bush.

WorldNetDaily: Child molestation and pedophilia occur far more commonly among homosexuals than among heterosexuals on a per capita basis, according to a new study.

2nd paragraphs

Frank Rich: The worst storm in our history proved perfect for exposing this president because in one big blast it illuminated all his failings: the rampant cronyism, the empty sloganeering of "compassionate conservatism," the lack of concern for the "underprivileged" his mother condescended to at the Astrodome, the reckless lack of planning for all government operations except tax cuts, the use of spin and photo-ops to camouflage failure and to substitute for action.

WorldNet Daily: "Overwhelming evidence supports the belief that homosexuality is a sexual deviancy often accompanied by disorders that have dire consequences for our culture," wrote Steve Baldwin in, "Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement," soon to be published by the Regent University Law Review.

One is clearly an opinion piece and is clearly prejudicial towards its subject (note the references to a "snake oil salesman" and "blowhard").... Bush is not given a chance to defend himself in the article..

The other simply states the results of a study, quotes researchers and then quotes gay activists who disagree with the findings.

According to you, the 2nd article is "full of hate and bigotry" even though there are quotes from those (and links to other sites) that give the opposite view.

 

[ProudDem]

Is this the article that you are referring to?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showpost.php?p=329550&postcount=1

Let's compare the two articles:

First sentence of the two articles

Frank Rich: ONCE Toto parts the curtain, the Wizard of Oz can never be the wizard again. He is forever Professor Marvel, blowhard and snake-oil salesman. Hurricane Katrina, which is likely to endure in the American psyche as long as L. Frank Baum's mythic tornado, has similarly unmasked George W. Bush.

WorldNetDaily: Child molestation and pedophilia occur far more commonly among homosexuals than among heterosexuals on a per capita basis, according to a new study.

2nd paragraphs

Frank Rich: The worst storm in our history proved perfect for exposing this president because in one big blast it illuminated all his failings: the rampant cronyism, the empty sloganeering of "compassionate conservatism," the lack of concern for the "underprivileged" his mother condescended to at the Astrodome, the reckless lack of planning for all government operations except tax cuts, the use of spin and photo-ops to camouflage failure and to substitute for action.

WorldNet Daily: "Overwhelming evidence supports the belief that homosexuality is a sexual deviancy often accompanied by disorders that have dire consequences for our culture," wrote Steve Baldwin in, "Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement," soon to be published by the Regent University Law Review.

One is clearly an opinion piece and is clearly prejudicial towards its subject (note the references to a "snake oil salesman" and "blowhard").... Bush is not given a chance to defend himself in the article..

The other simply states the results of a study, quotes researchers and then quotes gay activists who disagree with the findings.

According to you, the 2nd article is "full of hate and bigotry" even though there are quotes from those (and links to other sites) that give the opposite view.

But a story can lead towards one side. In my personal opinion, the article leans on the side of homophobes. There's nothing wrong with that, but I won't give it much probative value. You can--that's your prerogative. It's all a matter of opinion.

Based upon what you say above about gay people being abused in childhood, I know why you think the way you do. You unquestionably have a prejudice against them, so it's hard for you to see when someone else does.

What's your take on heterosexuals who remain heterosexuals and are abused as children?

 

[KarlMarx]

But a story can lead towards one side. In my personal opinion, the article leans on the side of homophobes. There's nothing wrong with that, but I won't give it much probative value. You can--that's your prerogative. It's all a matter of opinion.

Based upon what you say above about gay people being abused in childhood, I know why you think the way you do. You unquestionably have a prejudice against them, so it's hard for you to see when someone else does.

What's your take on heterosexuals who remain heterosexuals and are abused as children?

I know why I think the way I do....

Because many gay people have been abused in childhood.....

Of course, mostDWI convictions and traffic related accidents involving alcohol involve alcoholics.... so I must have something against alcoholics

Many cases of lung cancer involve smokers.... so I must have something against smokers

Some people are abused in childhood and remain heterosexual and others become gay..... that's my take on it.

P.S. Tolerance is not buy in.... for instance, just because I love my son, doesn't mean I approve of everything he does..... you seem to have a difficult time understanding that concept

 

[ProudDem]

I know why I think the way I do....

Because many gay people have been abused in childhood.....

Of course, mostDWI convictions and traffic related accidents involving alcohol involve alcoholics.... so I must have something against alcoholics

Many cases of lung cancer involve smokers.... so I must have something against smokers

Some people are abused in childhood and remain heterosexual and others become gay..... that's my take on it.

P.S. Tolerance is not buy in.... for instance, just because I love my son, doesn't mean I approve of everything he does..... you seem to have a difficult time understanding that concept

Okay, I see what you're saying above. You now say "many" homosexuals are abused in childhood. However, in the prior post, you said, "I think the real cowards are many gays, who are afraid if they really tried, they'd probably find that the real reason why they're gay is that they probably were abused in their child hood." I got the impression that you were asserting that the majority of gay people were abused in childhood.

I highly doubt that you would talk with such disdain regarding your son. The distain you exuded in your post tells me you have NO tolerance for gay people. There is a difference.

 

[Said1]

What's your take on heterosexuals who remain heterosexuals and are abused as children?

As in consequences?

 

[ProudDem]

As in consequences?

Well, his allegation was that gay people become gay because many of them are abused as children. I want to know what kind of an effect (sure, consequences) that abuse in childood has on people who remain heterosexual.

Clearly, he doesn't see that one becoming gay is a positive result.

 

[Said1]

Well, his allegation was that gay people become gay because many of them are abused as children. I want to know what kind of an effect (sure, consequences) that abuse in childood has on people who remain heterosexual.

Clearly, he doesn't see that one becoming gay is a positive result.

I see. You're saying being homosexual is better than promiscuity, anxiety disorders, mistrust, depression, exessive behavior(any "ism" will do, post traumaic stress, prostitution and on and on. Many homosexuals can check "yes" for the above, on top of being gay.

 

[ProudDem]

I see. You're saying being homosexual is better than promiscuity, anxiety disorders, mistrust, depression, exessive behavior(any "ism" will do, post traumaic stress, prostitution and on and on. Many homosexuals can check "yes" for the above, on top of being gay.

Are those the kinds of disorders or problems that heterosexuals develop as a result of being abused as children?

I don't put homosexuality in the same category as you do. I don't believe it's a psychiatric disorder or a consequence.

 

[KarlMarx]

Okay, I see what you're saying above. You now say "many" homosexuals are abused in childhood. However, in the prior post, you said, "I think the real cowards are many gays, who are afraid if they really tried, they'd probably find that the real reason why they're gay is that they probably were abused in their child hood." I got the impression that you were asserting that the majority of gay people were abused in childhood.

I highly doubt that you would talk with such disdain regarding your son. The distain you exuded in your post tells me you have NO tolerance for gay people. There is a difference.

I work with a gay person (outside of work).... one of the nicest guys I know...

He is trying to promote interest in silent films here in Binghamton....

I don't agree with his lifestyle, and I don't know much about his personal life... but I do think that his efforts in trying to raise interest in silent films is laudable... on occassion I help him out (he needed to borrow some DVDs of mine to show (I have some Chaplin and other silent film DVDs), I helped him with some paperwork that he needed to get non-profit organization status for what he was doing etc)

My son's tutor was a person that I suspected as being gay.... I never left the two of them alone together (but then, I wouldn't leave my son alone with any stranger). But he came highly recommended. Several years later, after he no longer was my son's tutor, I found that my suspicions were correct. Regardless. He helped my son in school, that's the important thing.

I wouldn't be talking about this.... but.......

So... tell me... are you willing to put aside your differences with religious fundamentalists if it does some good?

 

[Said1]

Are those the kinds of disorders or problems that heterosexuals develop as a result of being abused as children?

I don't put homosexuality in the same category as you do. I don't believe it's a psychiatric disorder or a consequence.

Why do you ask the most redundant questions, honestly, you must do it on purpose.

And you don't know what categoary I put homosexuality in, because I haven't said, have I? But yes, what I listed are some of the residual psychiataric disorders people develop as a result of being sexually abused as children. And yes, a high percentage of homosexuals suffer from them as a result of sexual abuse too.