Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Holy Fucking Christ on a Cracker...
Look what the cat dragged in...
peace...
Tell us more about this "closeted pedo" theory of yours.
Oh yeah... That was what it was...
peace...
mal, mal, malI Know why you started this thread. Pretty clever..... NOT!!!
Why not? Folks are born with a certain hair color....they are also born with a certain sexual orientation. The difference is that you can change the color of your hair with chemicals.
I understand that but to compare sexuality to hair though? I could go bad in my 30s and lose all my hair, I won't lose my sexuality.
Your hair color, like sexuality is determined by genetics My point was hair color can be altered....sexuality, not so much.
mal, mal, mal
^^^
Go Suck off a Chainsaw you Two-Faced Twat.
peace...
mal, mal, mal
^^^
Go Suck off a Chainsaw you Two-Faced Twat.
peace...
Using a slang term for a strictly female body part as a pejorative, eh?
Fascinating. That was in the title? How would I know that you wanted to switch the topic to something you seem to have some knowledge about when the topic is about homosexuality....that this "closeted pedo" topic you switch to? Hmmmm?Closeted Pedos are very Confused People I hear also...
They get all Angry and Cranky and Whiny when Challenged.
peace...
Oh?
^^^^Oh yeah... There's what first attracted her to this Thread...
Curious...
peace...
I understand that but to compare sexuality to hair though? I could go bad in my 30s and lose all my hair, I won't lose my sexuality.
Your hair color, like sexuality is determined by genetics My point was hair color can be altered....sexuality, not so much.
Well, to be perfectly accurate, one cannot change their hair color. They can mask it. They can cover it. They can hide it behind a facade....but it is what it is.
Fascinating. That was in the title? How would I know that you wanted to switch the topic to something you seem to have some knowledge about when the topic is about homosexuality....that this "closeted pedo" topic you switch to? Hmmmm?
^^^^Oh yeah... There's what first attracted her to this Thread...
Curious...
peace...
Curious, indeed. Who brings "closeted pedos" to the thread?
^^^
Go Suck off a Chainsaw you Two-Faced Twat.
peace...
Using a slang term for a strictly female body part as a pejorative, eh?
I said Cockhole in my second post...
YOUR first post in this Thread is Interesting though...
Insightful as to what Attacts you I guess?...
peace...
Fascinating. That was in the title? How would I know that you wanted to switch the topic to something you seem to have some knowledge about when the topic is about homosexuality....that this "closeted pedo" topic you switch to? Hmmmm?^^^^Oh yeah... There's what first attracted her to this Thread...
Curious...
peace...
Curious, indeed. Who brings "closeted pedos" to the thread?
^What the mention of Closeted Pedos does...
You read my OP... TONS of information and Links...
You Chose the Closeted Pedo post to make your Entry.
Noted.
peace...
Homosexuality: The Mental Illness That Went AwayAn alternative perspective on mental disorders | PHILIP HICKEY, PH.D.
According to the American Psychiatric Association, until 1974 homosexuality was a mental illness. Freud had alluded to homosexuality numerous times in his writings, and had concluded that paranoia and homosexuality were inseparable. Other psychiatrists wrote copiously on the subject, and homosexuality was treated on a wide basis. There was little or no suggestion within the psychiatric community that homosexuality might be conceptualized as anything other than a mental illness that needed to be treated. And, of course, homosexuality was listed as a mental illness in DSM-II.
Then in 1970 gay activists protested against the APA convention in San Francisco. These scenes were repeated in 1971, and as people came out of the closet and felt empowered politically and socially, the APA directorate became increasingly uncomfortable with their stance. In 1973 the APAs nomenclature task force recommended that homosexuality be declared normal. The trustees were not prepared to go that far, but they did vote to remove homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses by a vote of 13 to 0, with 2 abstentions. This decision was confirmed by a vote of the APA membership, and homosexuality was no longer listed in the seventh edition of DSM-II, which was issued in 1974.
Whats noteworthy about this is that the removal of homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses was not triggered by some scientific breakthrough. There was no new fact or set of facts that stimulated this major change. Rather, it was the simple reality that gay people started to kick up a fuss. They gained a voice and began to make themselves heard. And the APA reacted with truly astonishing speed. And with good reason. They realized intuitively that a protracted battle would have drawn increasing attention to the spurious nature of their entire taxonomy. So they quickly cut loose the gay community and forestalled any radical scrutiny of the DSM system generally.
Also noteworthy is the fact that the vote of the membership was by no means unanimous. Only about 55% of the members who voted favored the change.
Of course, the APA put the best spin they could on these events. The fact is that they altered their taxonomy because of intense pressure from the gay community, but they claimed that the change was prompted by research findings.
So all the people who had this terrible illness were cured overnight by a vote!
Read MOAR!:
Mental Health Diagnoses Decided by Vote, Not Discovery
And if you don't Believe this Doctor's Claims about the Protests, would you Believe Gays themselves?...
"The May 1971 Scene: A Bad Time for a Conference in Washington DC
The American Psychiatric Association (APA) held its annual convention in Washington DC during the first week of May 1971, amidst the turmoil and congestion of the MayDay antiwar demonstrations and at a time when the Gay MayDay contingent in those demonstrations had drawn large numbers of gay men and lesbians to the city. The convention was held at the Shoreham Hotel which backed up on Rock Creek Park. The scene in the city was chaotic: protestors, estimated at more than 10,000, (the remnants of an initial contingent of nearly 50,000) had spent the mornings of Monday May 3rd and Tuesday May 4th disrupting traffic, blocking roads and bridges, and trying to bring the normal business of government to a halt in protest against the Vietnam War. An even larger federal force, some 13,000, of soldiers (Marines and US Army), National Guardsmen, and police fought off the protestors. More than 10,000 were arrested. Tear gas and smoke were in the air in downtown Washington DC. The streets around the APA convention were patrolled
Following disruption by gay activists at the 1970 convention in San Francisco, the APA offered a conference panel discussion to be organized by Dr. Kameny, who invited Barbara Gittings, Jack Baker and others to participate in a discussion entitled "Lifestyles of Nonpatient Homosexuals", which ensured the panelists admittance to all of the convention's activities including the annual Convocation of Fellows."
1971: Zapping the APA Convention
The best part about this History is that at this time Gay Organizations were Directly in Line with and Marching with NAMBLA... Fact not Fiction.
It wasn't until 1994 that the Gay Community was finally "outed" regarding their Ties to NAMBLA when the ILGA was removed from the World Conference on Population and Disease for it.
Since that year, they have been Smart enough to Avoid their old Friends...
But not always:
University of Minnesota Press book challenges anxiety about pedophilia
Mark O'Keefe Newhouse News Service
Published Mar 26, 2002
Source: StarTribune.com: News, weather, sports from Minneapolis, St. Paul and Minnesota (Link has since been Purged by the Star... Of course... But I have the entire thing here)
Sex between adults and children has been a societal taboo so strong that it's considered one of our few unquestioned moral principles. But arguments have emerged in academic journals, books and online that at least some such sex should be acceptable, especially when children consent to it...
With more research, some scholars say, it may be only a matter of time before modern society accepts adult-child sex, just as it has learned to accept premarital sex and homosexual sex.
"Children are the last bastion of the old sexual morality," wrote one of the trailblazers for this view, Harris Mirkin, an associate professor of political science at the University of Missouri-Kansas City...
Mirkin, whose academic specialty is the politics of sex, wrote in a 1999 article published in The Journal of Homosexuality that society perceives youths as seduced, abused victims and not "partners or initiators or willing participants" in sex with adults, "even if they are hustlers."
In an interview, Mirkin said the outrage surrounding the Roman Catholic Church's pedophilia scandal illustrates how the public views acts of intergenerational contact as "one big blur" of child abuse when it's likely "very, very mild stuff."
"We say if someone touches or molests or diddles or whatever a kid it will ruin the rest of their life. I don't believe it. I think kids are more likely to laugh at it more than anything else -- unless the whole culture says this is the most horrible thing that can happen to you."
Mirkin is not alone in questioning whether children are harmed by sexual contact with adults. The March 2002 American Psychologist devotes its entire issue to the ongoing fallout of a journal article that did just that.
The piece, in the July 1998 issue of Psychological Bulletin, was written by Bruce Rind, then an assistant professor of psychology at Temple University; Robert Bauserman, a lecturer then with the department of psychology at the University of Michigan; and Philip Tromovitch, then pursuing a doctorate at the University of Pennsylvania.
The trio reviewed 59 studies of college students who, as children, had sexual interaction with significantly older people or were coerced into sexual activity with someone of their own age. They concluded that negative effects "were neither pervasive nor typically intense, and that men reacted much less negatively than women." It recommended that a child's "willing encounter with positive reactions" be called "adult-child sex" instead of "abuse."
A soon-to-be-released book, "Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children From Sex," is being advertised by its publisher, University of Minnesota Press, as challenging widespread anxieties about pedophilia.
In an interview, the book's author, journalist Judith Levine, praised the Rind study as evidence that "doesn't line up with the ideology that it's always harmful for kids to have sexual relationships with adults."
She said the pedophilia among Roman Catholic priests is complicated to analyze, because it's almost always secret, considered forbidden and involves an authority figure.
She added, however, that, "yes, conceivably, absolutely" a boy's sexual experience with a priest could be positive."...
You can read MOAR at the link under the headline.
Of course I will be Attacked for Observing what is... But what I have Posted is 100% True.
And if you Doubt for a Minute that the Pedo's are the Gays of the 50's and 60's right now to the Gay Community, then you are kidding yourselves.
The ONLY Reason most of them Distances themselves from NAMBLA and the others is because they got Caught and it Harmed their own Agenda.
History is what it is... If you want to be Angry about History then so be it.
I'm just an Observer.
peace...
Using a slang term for a strictly female body part as a pejorative, eh?
I said Cockhole in my second post...
YOUR first post in this Thread is Interesting though...
Insightful as to what Attacts you I guess?...
peace...
So...we are BACK to a topic in your comfort zone again?
weed 
yet mal?
I thought our posses had a truce? 
