Elmo Wishes Kids A Happy Pride Month

[JoeB131]

Being icky along with against nature is reason enough to discourage it

Okay, you do realize that a lot of straight people engage in anal, fellatio and cunnilingus, just like the icky old gays do, right?

As far as nature, homosexuality exists in the animal kingdom.

 

[Mac-7]

As far as nature, homosexuality exists in the animal kingdom.

So does murder and rape

 

[toobfreak]

Elmo Wishes Kids A Happy Pride Month​

Maybe Elmo just wanted a tickle. Get it? That was very, very, bunny.

 

[Winco]

We are talking 3 and 4 year olds here.

You have NEVER cared about other peoples 3 and 4 year olds.
Quit pretending that NOW you somehow care.

 

[Mac-7]

Okay, you do realize that a lot of straight people engage in anal, fellatio and cunnilingus, just like the icky old gays do, right?

I do

There is no sin that libs promote that conservatives are not susceptible to

But far fewer and much less acceptable

 

[HeyNorm]

Okay, you do realize that a lot of straight people engage in anal, fellatio and cunnilingus, just like the icky old gays do, right?

As far as nature, homosexuality exists in the animal kingdom.

Do they throw parades celebrating it? Nationwide?

Homosexual activity exists in nature ONLY when the opposite sex do not.

 

[JoeB131]

Do they throw parades celebrating it? Nationwide?

They don't need to. It's considered the norm for straight people.

Homosexual activity exists in nature ONLY when the opposite sex do not.

Um, no.

Homosexual behavior in animals - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Various non-human animal species exhibit behavior that can be interpreted as homosexual or bisexual. This may include same-sex sexual activity, courtship, affection, pair bonding, and parenting among same-sex animal pairs.[1][2][3] Various forms of this are found in every major geographic region and every major animal group. The sexual behavior of non-human animals takes many different forms, even within the same species, though homosexual behavior is best known from social species.

Scientists perceive homosexual behavior in animals to different degrees. According to Bruce Bagemihl, same-sex behavior (comprising courtship, sexual, pair-bonding, and parental activities) has been documented in over 450 species of animals worldwide.

 

[HeyNorm]

They don't need to. It's considered the norm for straight people.



Um, no.

Homosexual behavior in animals - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Various non-human animal species exhibit behavior that can be interpreted as homosexual or bisexual. This may include same-sex sexual activity, courtship, affection, pair bonding, and parenting among same-sex animal pairs.[1][2][3] Various forms of this are found in every major geographic region and every major animal group. The sexual behavior of non-human animals takes many different forms, even within the same species, though homosexual behavior is best known from social species.

Scientists perceive homosexual behavior in animals to different degrees. According to Bruce Bagemihl, same-sex behavior (comprising courtship, sexual, pair-bonding, and parental activities) has been documented in over 450 species of animals worldwide.

From the same article:

stated that "[a]lthough homosexual behavior is very common in the animal world, it seems to be very uncommon that individual animals have a long-lasting predisposition to engage in such behavior to the exclusion of heterosexual activities.

Gee Joe, what else you got?

 

[JoeB131]

From the same article:

stated that "[a]lthough homosexual behavior is very common in the animal world, it seems to be very uncommon that individual animals have a long-lasting predisposition to engage in such behavior to the exclusion of heterosexual activities.

Gee Joe, what else you got?

One proposal for the adaptive function of homosexual behavior is the formation of alliances and mutual social benefit to the animals. Studies support this in specific species, such as black swans, where a quarter of mate pairs consist of two males, who mate with a female and chase her away once she lays the egg, then raise it themselves. These M-M pairs have great success in defending their territory and resources, and keep their young alive until fledgling 80% of the time, compared to 30% for M-F pairs.[37]

Studies done on homosexual behavior in birds showed a negative correlation between relative parental investment and F-F homosexual behaviors, i.e. females that invested more time and care into their young relative to males had less homosexual encounters. Similarly, there was a negative correlation between relative parental investment and M-M homosexual behaviors. This meant that species exhibiting a high degree of polygamy (where females often are the exclusive caretakers of the young) F-F sexual behaviors were very rare, whereas in a socially monogamous species (in which a M-F pair works together to care for young) they were much more common. The trend was opposite for males, in polygamous species M-M sexual behaviors were quite common and in socially monogamous species they were rare. The study argues that release from parental care, a very energy intensive investment, allows the opportunities for homosexual behaviors to be exhibited, and higher parental care prevents homosexual behaviors from occurring because of the energy cost of the behaviors.[38]

A 2019 paper hypothesized that when sex first began to evolve, there was no distinction between homosexuality and heterosexuality, and animals mated with other members of their species indiscriminately. This is a contrast to most perspectives, which try to find explanations for the evolution of homosexual behaviors and separate it completely from the evolution of heterosexual behaviors. The study states that it is unlikely that sexual behaviors evolved simultaneously to the evolution of traits necessary to recognize a compatible sexual mate, such as size, shape, odor, and color. As those secondary sex characteristics evolved, sexuality would have become more discriminatory, leading to less homosexuality, but homosexual behaviors would rarely have had enough cost to be selected against and removed entirely from a population. Additionally, the cost of homosexual behavior would be offset by the cost of mate recognition, which requires psychological adaptations, and excessive discrimination in mate choice can lead to missing out of mating opportunities. With indiscriminate mating, these factors are irrelevant. The paper notes that in some species, especially where survival is very difficult and each energy-related decision could mean the animal's death, homosexual behavior would be strongly selected against, leading strictly heterosexual species.[39]

 

[ChristisKing]

No more than a little boy and a little girl doing it. They are probably too young for that stuff.

My point exactly. So why is that stuff brought into our schools in the first place?

 

[HeyNorm]

One proposal for the adaptive function of homosexual behavior is the formation of alliances and mutual social benefit to the animals. Studies support this in specific species, such as black swans, where a quarter of mate pairs consist of two males, who mate with a female and chase her away once she lays the egg, then raise it themselves. These M-M pairs have great success in defending their territory and resources, and keep their young alive until fledgling 80% of the time, compared to 30% for M-F pairs.[37]

Studies done on homosexual behavior in birds showed a negative correlation between relative parental investment and F-F homosexual behaviors, i.e. females that invested more time and care into their young relative to males had less homosexual encounters. Similarly, there was a negative correlation between relative parental investment and M-M homosexual behaviors. This meant that species exhibiting a high degree of polygamy (where females often are the exclusive caretakers of the young) F-F sexual behaviors were very rare, whereas in a socially monogamous species (in which a M-F pair works together to care for young) they were much more common. The trend was opposite for males, in polygamous species M-M sexual behaviors were quite common and in socially monogamous species they were rare. The study argues that release from parental care, a very energy intensive investment, allows the opportunities for homosexual behaviors to be exhibited, and higher parental care prevents homosexual behaviors from occurring because of the energy cost of the behaviors.[38]

A 2019 paper hypothesized that when sex first began to evolve, there was no distinction between homosexuality and heterosexuality, and animals mated with other members of their species indiscriminately. This is a contrast to most perspectives, which try to find explanations for the evolution of homosexual behaviors and separate it completely from the evolution of heterosexual behaviors. The study states that it is unlikely that sexual behaviors evolved simultaneously to the evolution of traits necessary to recognize a compatible sexual mate, such as size, shape, odor, and color. As those secondary sex characteristics evolved, sexuality would have become more discriminatory, leading to less homosexuality, but homosexual behaviors would rarely have had enough cost to be selected against and removed entirely from a population. Additionally, the cost of homosexual behavior would be offset by the cost of mate recognition, which requires psychological adaptations, and excessive discrimination in mate choice can lead to missing out of mating opportunities. With indiscriminate mating, these factors are irrelevant. The paper notes that in some species, especially where survival is very difficult and each energy-related decision could mean the animal's death, homosexual behavior would be strongly selected against, leading strictly heterosexual species.[39]

Are you a duck?

 

[Mushroom]

I am not sure which is more disturbing. Having a skit on the show set in one of the most violent and sexualized shows ever on US TV, or that some kids might actually recognize the show.

And that Elmo is actually trying to help one of the most evil and genocidal characters in the entire series.

 

[JoeB131]

My point exactly. So why is that stuff brought into our schools in the first place?

Because it exists, and pretending it doesn't causes other problems.

A generation ago, people like you were upset that we had sex education in the schools at all. But the benefits of it cannot be denied. When kids had an understanding of what their bodies were going through, they made better choices.

Same thing here. Whether you like it or not, 10% of those kids are going to grow up to be gay and 1% of them are going to grow up to be trans.

Helping them understand it and deal with it in a healthy way is beneficial.

Or we can tell them that sex makes Baby Jesus Cry, that's always rational.

 

[TNHarley]

You have NEVER cared about other peoples 3 and 4 year olds.
Quit pretending that NOW you somehow care.

You dont know what i care about, lying FAGAt.

 

[ChristisKing]

Because it exists, and pretending it doesn't causes other problems.

A generation ago, people like you were upset that we had sex education in the schools at all. But the benefits of it cannot be denied. When kids had an understanding of what their bodies were going through, they made better choices.

Same thing here. Whether you like it or not, 10% of those kids are going to grow up to be gay and 1% of them are going to grow up to be trans.

Helping them understand it and deal with it in a healthy way is beneficial.

Or we can tell them that sex makes Baby Jesus Cry, that's always rational.

1. This has absolutely nothing do with sex education in schools at the appropriate grade level.

2. 10% and 1% of LGBTQ kids? This is what this is all about?

 

[JoeB131]

1. This has absolutely nothing do with sex education in schools at the appropriate grade level.

I agree. First grade, they should be told gay people exist and there's nothing wrong with that.
Junior high, you can talk about the mechanics of sex.

2. 10% and 1% of LGBTQ kids? This is what this is all about?

10% of the population is gay.
1% is transgender.

 

[ChristisKing]

I agree. First grade, they should be told gay people exist and there's nothing wrong with that.




10% of the population is gay.
1% is transgender.

No they shouldn't be told that in first grade or any elementary school grade. Gay people shouldn't be brought up at all until at least middle school and I still don't get your point about the percentages.

 

[JoeB131]

No they shouldn't be told that in first grade or any elementary school grade. Gay people shouldn't be brought up at all until at least middle school and I still don't get your point about the percentages.

10 % of their classmates will grow up to be gay. That's my point. Telling them that at an early age will help everyone adjust to it better when it happens.

Frankly, I went to a repressed Catholic School, and they still gave us sex education starting in the sixth grade.

 

[BackAgain]

Elmo had some guy’s hand up his ass for too long.

 

[ChristisKing]

10 % of their classmates will grow up to be gay. That's my point. Telling them that at an early age will help everyone adjust to it better when it happens.

Whatever.