Understanding the Roots of the LGBT Movement...You've Been Gaslighted, Chump!

[Syriusly]

Gaslighting tip #88442: "Pretend like 2014 didn't happen..."...

Nobody in 2014 ran on Homophobia. They ran on "We hate ObamaCare".

First of all, people who object to your perverse "sex lives as identities" aren't "homophobic"..

You- you are homophobic.

 

[JoeB131]

First of all, people who object to your perverse "sex lives as identities" aren't "homophobic". They're merely disgusted; as well they should be. Think of something that just viscerally disgusts you (if there is anything, maybe the idea of devout and self-reflecting people who practice self control?). Then imagine you saying "this (x) disgusts me". Then immediately you are labelled a "hater" of (x).. and are henceforth branded "x-ophobic".. So, gaslighting 101 demands that anyone who objects to the dogma of the Church of LGBT is branded a heretic, no matter what the merit of their objection is..enough people "punished" in this way and the rest will come around to the rainbow fold in time...

I've been over this with you. Broccoli disgusts me. But what I don't do is what you do, go on a crusade where broccoli controls every aspect of my waking life. I don't make dire predictions about how the anti-broccoli revolution is at hand and I don't make up bullshit stories about my childhood friend who ate broccoli once and died.

And most people are all like, "Oh, you don't like brocolli?" and that's like totally cool with them.

People don't have to run on "homophobia". The visceral disgust present in most of the voting public, no matter what they're saying in what they perceive is mixed company, isn't going anywhere. Disgust is disgust. You can't wrap dog shit in a candy wrapper and have the eater be any less disgusted by the taste.. Pair that up with an ad campaign showing where the Church of LGBT is currently heading in their legal coup (catholic adoption agencies) and you're going to have a real problem on your hands come November 2016, with or without an expressed platform this way or the other..

Except this isn't 2004, where you can try to wrap up your homophobia in nice legal terms and have people go along with it. People see it for what it is now. Which is why politicians of BOTH parties are steering away.

We had the discussion, and the best argument you could come up with is "I think it's icky!"

 

[Silhouette]

I've been over this with you. Broccoli disgusts me. But what I don't do is what you do, go on a crusade where broccoli controls every aspect of my waking life. I don't make dire predictions about how the anti-broccoli revolution is at hand and I don't make up bullshit stories about my childhood friend who ate broccoli once and died.

And most people are all like, "Oh, you don't like brocolli?" and that's like totally cool with them.

Remember, this thread is about gaslighting and I'm going to expose every point you make under that umbrella...

Gaslighting demands that the HIV epidemic and how we know its spreading be equated in the minds of readers as "just another preference, like broccoli...some like it and some don't...but that doesn't mean it should be frowned upon by those that don't.."

Joe, the effects of broccoli and HIV on the human body are worlds apart. Our entire society benefits by rejecting men using another man's anus as an artificial vagina. That behavior belongs in private, among those poor addicts who don't even know the subconscious mechanisms behind their fetish. The last thing on earth a society stuck in the ravishes of this spreading epidemic is to promote the idea to anyone that "men using other men's digestive tracts as artificial vaginas is OK!"

Broccoli doesn't do THIS to people....see the difference?

Though I never did see my friend in the hospital at the end of his life, I'm sure he looked very similar to this poor youngster who somehow got it in his head that being used as an artificial vagina for another man was a good idea..

People don't have to run on "homophobia". The visceral disgust present in most of the voting public, no matter what they're saying in what they perceive is mixed company, isn't going anywhere. Disgust is disgust. You can't wrap dog shit in a candy wrapper and have the eater be any less disgusted by the taste.. Pair that up with an ad campaign showing where the Church of LGBT is currently heading in their legal coup (catholic adoption agencies) and you're going to have a real problem on your hands come November 2016, with or without an expressed platform this way or the other..

Except this isn't 2004, where you can try to wrap up your homophobia in nice legal terms and have people go along with it. People see it for what it is now. Which is why politicians of BOTH parties are steering away.

We had the discussion, and the best argument you could come up with is "I think it's icky!"

Look at the picture. People don't think it's icky to copulate with the fecal-ridden lower digestive tract...with its porous membrane soaking up HIV infected semen right into the bloodstream...they know it IS icky...and deadly dangerous too...

 

[Skylar]

I've been over this with you. Broccoli disgusts me. But what I don't do is what you do, go on a crusade where broccoli controls every aspect of my waking life. I don't make dire predictions about how the anti-broccoli revolution is at hand and I don't make up bullshit stories about my childhood friend who ate broccoli once and died.

And most people are all like, "Oh, you don't like brocolli?" and that's like totally cool with them.

Remember, this thread is about gaslighting and I'm going to expose every point you make under that umbrella...

No, you're going to feed your insane obsession and pathological hatred of gay people. As by your own admission these posts damage your heath, hurt you mentally, and are something you need to stop.

But your disease is stronger than your need for self preservation. Thus, perhaps the 20th thread of batshit insanity dedicated to your hatred of gays.

Gaslighting demands that the HIV epidemic and how we know its spreading be equated in the minds of readers as "just another preference, like broccoli...some like it and some don't...but that doesn't mean it should be frowned upon by those that don't.."

The HIV epidemic effects heterosexuals most often. Yet you ignore this fact and focus exclusively on gays. Making up elaborate delusions and baseless fantasies to support your fiction.

If the transmission of HIV were your focus, you'd focus on the transmission of the disease, regardless of the sexual orientation of victim. Instead, you blames gays specifically, repeatedly, and obsessively. This despite the very method of transmission you're railing against: anal sex.....being most common among heterosexuals as well.

But you ignore that too......as your motivation isn't HIV. You're motivated by your hatred of gays. Which is why you focus on them exclusively and myopically despite overwhelming contradictory evidence. And to the extreme detriment to your own mental and physical health, by your own admission.

In short, you're mentally ill.

 

[JoeB131]

Look at the picture. People don't think it's icky to copulate with the fecal-ridden lower digestive tract...with its porous membrane soaking up HIV infected semen right into the bloodstream...they know it IS icky...and deadly dangerous too...

One more time.

38% of Straights have Anal Sex.

50% of gays don't. (They are called "Lesbians)

Most people with HIV in the world are in fact- straight.

 

[Silhouette]

One more time.

38% of Straights have Anal Sex.

50% of gays don't. (They are called "Lesbians)

Most people with HIV in the world are in fact- straight.

Purposefully misleading statistical information? From an LGBT faithful blogger? Egads!

...One more time. 38% of heterosexual men (those using real vaginas instead of an artificial one...the anus..) may have TRIED anal sex with their female partner once or twice...probably to avoid pregnancy.. And that may have been before it was well known that the colon fast tracks disease right into the bloodstream.

Gay MEN in contrast rely on the anus as an artificial vagina whenever pelvic intercourse occurs. So, there is no gay man "occasionally" using the anus as an artificial vagina. They do it regularly, constantly. And this ups their susceptibility to getting and passing on HIV into the herd. Because gay men, like most victims of childhood molestation, are notoriously sexually-manic (promiscuous). And since gay male sex in particular is the paragon of hundreds (or even thousands) of lifetime anonymous sexual encounters (think bath houses, gas stations etc.), we have a "situation" going on with the HIV epidemic as to ONE DEMOGRAPHIC in particular.

Lesbians usually don't "get around" as much...and hence why you don't find me talking about them that much; except where adopting kids and institutionally-depriving them of a father for life is concerned..

From a survey of 3,000 gay men done by the CDC...:

ATLANTA [2005 Clinical Psychiatry News] -- Substance abuse is pervasive among gay men and is so intricately intertwined with epidemics of depression, partner abuse, and childhood sexual abuse that adequately addressing one issue requires attention to the others as well, said Ronald Stall, Ph.D., chief of prevention research for the division of HIV/AIDS prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta...

 

[Skylar]

One more time.

38% of Straights have Anal Sex.

50% of gays don't. (They are called "Lesbians)

Most people with HIV in the world are in fact- straight.

Purposefully misleading statistical information? From an LGBT faithful blogger? Egads!

...One more time. 38% of heterosexual men (those using real vaginas instead of an artificial one...the anus..) may have TRIED anal sex with their female partner once or twice...probably to avoid pregnancy.. And that may have been before it was well known that the colon fast tracks disease right into the bloodstream.

Says you, citing yourself. You're literally making it up as you go along, backed by nothing. And your babble means nothing.

Back in reality, the overwhelming majority of those engaging in anal sex are straight. As more than 1 in 3 straights engaged in anal sex. And straights outnumber gays by an order of magnitude. You know this. You ignore this.

Why? Because your hatred is of gay people. So anyone who isn't gay that meets all of your imagined 'critiera' you ignore. This has nothing to do with lives, children, HIV or anything but your insane pathological obsession with gay folks.

You've started at least 20 threads about gays. You post of virtually nothing other than homosexuality and anal sex. Its your obsession.

You know that the HIV affects straights more than it does gays. Yet you ignore this too. Why? Because you don't give a fuck about HIV, you don't care about lives, you don't care about kids, you don't care about anything but hurting gay people.

No thank you.

 

[JoeB131]

Purposefully misleading statistical information? From an LGBT faithful blogger? Egads!

...One more time. 38% of heterosexual men (those using real vaginas instead of an artificial one...the anus..) may have TRIED anal sex with their female partner once or twice...probably to avoid pregnancy.. And that may have been before it was well known that the colon fast tracks disease right into the bloodstream.

Gay MEN in contrast rely on the anus as an artificial vagina whenever pelvic intercourse occurs. So, there is no gay man "occasionally" using the anus as an artificial vagina. They do it regularly, constantly. And this ups their susceptibility to getting and passing on HIV into the herd. Because gay men, like most victims of childhood molestation, are notoriously sexually-manic (promiscuous). And since gay male sex in particular is the paragon of hundreds (or even thousands) of lifetime anonymous sexual encounters (think bath houses, gas stations etc.), we have a "situation" going on with the HIV epidemic as to ONE DEMOGRAPHIC in particular.

Silly is like a Vegetarian who just can't stop talking about Steak.

 

[JoeB131]

Lesbians usually don't "get around" as much...and hence why you don't find me talking about them that much; except where adopting kids and institutionally-depriving them of a father for life is concerned..

You mean the dykes aren't doing things you secretly fantasize about, but I imagine a lot of straights find cunnilingus kind of icky, too.

 

[Silhouette]

No Joe. It's what I said, not what you're spinning.

 

[Silhouette]

Says you, citing yourself. You're literally making it up as you go along, backed by nothing. And your babble means nothing.

...You know that the HIV affects straights more than it does gays. Yet you ignore this too. Why?

Skylar is one of my more favorite gaslighters. And that is because his gaslighting is so "out there" that you have to really do mental gymnastics to even try to reach the alternate reality he's trying to lie his way into your mind. In other words, he is like a living red flag.

(Hey Skylar, this isn't me talking here vv .... it's the CDC. Why don't you tell them how HIV affects straights IN AMERICA more than it does gays?)

Gay and bisexual men are more severely affected by HIV than any other group in the United States....In 2010, gay and bisexual men accounted for 63% of estimated new HIV infections in the United States and 78% of infections among all newly infected men. From 2008 to 2010, new HIV infections increased 22% among young (aged 13-24) gay and bisexual men and 12% among gay and bisexual men overall... Gay and Bisexual Men | HIV by Group | HIV/AIDS | CDC

Yep...a giant red flag America... "You're being gaslighted" Thank you Skylar.

 

[Silhouette]

Well Skyturd? You're saying the CDC is clueless about our HIV/AIDS epidemic? Don't you have a gaslighting spin for the quote in my last post and its source? I can't wait to hear it...

 

[JoeB131]

No Joe. It's what I said, not what you're spinning.

Guy, you spend so much time talking about Anal Sex that one has to conclude you fantasize about it. A Lot.

Put down the gay porn and be true to yourself.

 

[il Tupe]

 

[Silhouette]

That's a bit off topic. But whatever serves to get the focus off the truth...oh...wait....that's right. This thread is about surreptitious behavior...

 

[Silhouette]

Yes, demonize anyone talking about anal sex. Because if you can't win an argument, you might as well kill it in the cradle with verbal bullying...

Guy, we've already WON the argument. The argument is over. Gays can get married, and you have to bake their cakes for them.

you've lost the argument. The argument is done. The Plutocrats used you homophobes to screw the middle class, but now they are done with you, which is why big corporations told Pence and Hutchison and the other knuckledraggers to knock it the fuck off.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you won't like the content of this OP: Foundation of American Law at Risk: Obergefell 2015 A Reversible Ruling? | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

There's nothing like solid legal footing and new lawsuits to rain on your perfect "we won now go away!" gaslighting. Rape victims have a right and a duty to fight back. We were legally raped and that OP shows it in spades..

 

[Montrovant]

Yes, demonize anyone talking about anal sex. Because if you can't win an argument, you might as well kill it in the cradle with verbal bullying...

Guy, we've already WON the argument. The argument is over. Gays can get married, and you have to bake their cakes for them.

you've lost the argument. The argument is done. The Plutocrats used you homophobes to screw the middle class, but now they are done with you, which is why big corporations told Pence and Hutchison and the other knuckledraggers to knock it the fuck off.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you won't like the content of this OP: Foundation of American Law at Risk: Obergefell 2015 A Reversible Ruling? | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

There's nothing like solid legal footing and new lawsuits to rain on your perfect "we won now go away!" gaslighting. Rape victims have a right and a duty to fight back. We were legally raped and that OP shows it in spades..

Has anyone ever linked to their own threads as often as you?

 

[Silhouette]

Has anyone ever linked to their own threads as often as you?

It's just easier than going into the whole spiel here or to risk going off topic. Don't you think?

 

[JoeB131]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you won't like the content of this OP: Foundation of American Law at Risk: Obergefell 2015 A Reversible Ruling? | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

There's nothing like solid legal footing and new lawsuits to rain on your perfect "we won now go away!" gaslighting. Rape victims have a right and a duty to fight back. We were legally raped and that OP shows it in spades..

Guy, Obergefell has no effect on your life whatsoever. and since Hillary is probably going to be appointing the next four SCOTUS justices, we are probably stuck with it despite your fever dreams.

The fact is, you guys are reduced to arguing about wedding cakes or whether a pig like Kim Davis has to put her signature on a marriage license. That's kind of pathetic, really.

 

[Silhouette]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you won't like the content of this OP: Foundation of American Law at Risk: Obergefell 2015 A Reversible Ruling? | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

There's nothing like solid legal footing and new lawsuits to rain on your perfect "we won now go away!" gaslighting. Rape victims have a right and a duty to fight back. We were legally raped and that OP shows it in spades..

Guy, Obergefell has no effect on your life whatsoever. and since Hillary is probably going to be appointing the next four SCOTUS justices, we are probably stuck with it despite your fever dreams.

The fact is, you guys are reduced to arguing about wedding cakes or whether a pig like Kim Davis has to put her signature on a marriage license. That's kind of pathetic, really.

Joe's next gaslighting trick: "Since gay marriage doesn't impact other adults, it wont' harm children either". Except, the logical connection isn't there. Adults minds are fledged. Childrens' are not. Marriage and how that contract was revised impacts them heavily and permanently...and that impact extends to society into the unforeseen future..

Obergefell has a direct impact on children's lives into time unforeseeable into the future. And as such, it has an impact on the society my grandchildren will inherit. Since I'm devilishly devoted to the world my grandchildren will inherit, I have a vested interest in how Obergefell revised a contract without the permission of children who shared it for THOUSANDS of years and for whom the contract was created for in the first place. Depriving them as a matter of law, newly, of either a mother or father for life, without their consent as to that revision is ILLEGAL. And it was illegal in Obergefell. A new Hearing will have to be scheduled with attorneys representing the rights of infants to the marriage contract's proposed revision...in each state it was illegally modified...that would be all of them. As far as I know, not one single children's advocate had argument heard in any state with "legal" gay marriage as to their rights and needs of having their original contract honored.

There will be no Hillary. The party of "gay" is not going to win this next Fall. I don't usually bet on things, not being the gambling type. But Hillary is a dog that won't hunt. She's got rainbow hobbles on.