Homosexuals say they didn't identify as homosexual until after sexually molested

[Indofred]

Interesting!

"Sixty-eight percent of the present homosexual male participants and 38% of the present homosexual female participants (68 and 36%, respectively, if including just the homosexual fair participants) did not identify as homosexual until after the molestation."

That would suggest most men are homosexual but don't know it.
Personally, I don't believe I am as I like Syrenn's avatars way too much.

 

[Vox]

Who has claimed they are?

the CDC
naming them as such.which includes 166 boys UNDER the age of 13.

No, they called the 13 and over group young men.

that is exactly what both KG an me are pointing at - the hiding of the fact of the underage boys contracting STDs under ambiguous terminology of "young men"

13-18 year olds are NOT young men. Certainly not 13 year olds.
the graph which Coyote provided showed that 166 under age of 13 contracted HIV sexually!!!

 

[Coyote]

I provided the quotes and links already. Go back and read the thread.

Your quotes and links aren't your supporting your claim of older men having sex with children. "Men have sex with men" is nothing more than stating it is male to male. There is no breakdown whatsoever on age of partners. You are also looking at a tiny group - there is virtually none in the age group under 15.



Accept they aren't. Look at the graph. The increase is in the 15-19 and even more the 20-24 age range. At least be honest about your figures.



First of all - provide evidence that CDC is attempting to disguise it - not just your distorted conjecture.

Here is there fact sheet on HIV in women. They include 13 yr olds in their figures. They call them ALL women. Do you suppose they are disguising pedophillia where men are molesting 13 yr old girls?

Because as we all know, the safety of children means nothing to the homo lobby. Children are a tool, and nothing more.

Pedophilia is pedophilia KG. It's illegal and rightfully so - regardless of whether the victim is male or female and the predator is male or female.

If you are going to accuse the "homo lobby" and CDC of collaborating to hide pedophilia (a pretty serious accusation) then you need to provide some hard data beyond the simple choice of words in a report and perhaps enlighten us as to your lack of concern about 13 yr old girls with HIV being grouped as "women" and having sex with "men".

you are being DISHONEST here.

Where am I being dishonest?

There are even children - 166 of them !!!! under the age of 13 - so you are considering them no be not important as well?

Go back to the OP and read what she is claiming: "....that 13 year old boys being infected with HIV at an exponential rate".

Whether or not I think they are "important" is a strawman here. They are not being infected at an "exponential rate" they represent a tiny tiny group and a false claim by the OP.

or you think they are getting infected by STDs from the same 13 and under boys?

They could be getting infected by 13 yr olds, or 14, 15,16 etc etc. or adults - there is no evidence either way. However - IF they are getting infected by adults that is illegal and should be prosecuted and, may very well have been prosecuted - again, there is no evidence that shows what happened in those cases. CDC only collects data on infection.

please, stop defend the homosexual rapists if you want to have some integrity remained.

I suggest you go back and READ and improve your reading comprehension skills before you start accusing anyone here of "defending" ANY kind of child rapists.

 

[Vox]

Your quotes and links aren't your supporting your claim of older men having sex with children. "Men have sex with men" is nothing more than stating it is male to male. There is no breakdown whatsoever on age of partners. You are also looking at a tiny group - there is virtually none in the age group under 15.



Accept they aren't. Look at the graph. The increase is in the 15-19 and even more the 20-24 age range. At least be honest about your figures.



First of all - provide evidence that CDC is attempting to disguise it - not just your distorted conjecture.

Here is there fact sheet on HIV in women. They include 13 yr olds in their figures. They call them ALL women. Do you suppose they are disguising pedophillia where men are molesting 13 yr old girls?



Pedophilia is pedophilia KG. It's illegal and rightfully so - regardless of whether the victim is male or female and the predator is male or female.

If you are going to accuse the "homo lobby" and CDC of collaborating to hide pedophilia (a pretty serious accusation) then you need to provide some hard data beyond the simple choice of words in a report and perhaps enlighten us as to your lack of concern about 13 yr old girls with HIV being grouped as "women" and having sex with "men".

you are being DISHONEST here.

Where am I being dishonest?




Go back to the OP and read what she is claiming: "....that 13 year old boys being infected with HIV at an exponential rate".

Whether or not I think they are "important" is a strawman here. They are not being infected at an "exponential rate" they represent a tiny tiny group and a false claim by the OP.

or you think they are getting infected by STDs from the same 13 and under boys?

They could be getting infected by 13 yr olds, or 14, 15,16 etc etc.

please, stop defend the homosexual rapists if you want to have some integrity remained.

I suggest you go back and READ and improve your reading comprehension skills before you start accusing anyone here of "defending" ANY kind of child rapists.

you can get infected by a newborn as well. if a newborn was infected by an adult beforehand.

the chance of getting infected by your peer is ZERO at the age of 13. or 14.

and 14-15 year olds are not getting it from their peers as well.

Stop pretending.
you know perfectly well that 13-14 year old boys do not get into HOMOSEXUAL relationships with their peers.
They have to be introduced into the practice by older men.

 

[Indofred]

Interesting! "Men having Sex with Men" or "MSMs" ages 13-24 (yup, apparently 13 year olds who are too young to give consent are being considered as "men" by the CDC these days)

The red highlight is of some concern.
At 13 years old, boy or girl, they aren't adults and should not be deemed as such, especially in anything sexual.
One wonders if the left wing, for 'tis them that generally do this, are into ******* children, or if it's just misguided stupidity about being inclusive that allows older men to **** children.
For me, whatever type of sex between an adult and a child is less than acceptable for a wide variety of reasons.
Pretty much the same reasons apply to two kids having sex, with a few of those reasons left out as they don't apply.

 

[Vox]

Interesting! "Men having Sex with Men" or "MSMs" ages 13-24 (yup, apparently 13 year olds who are too young to give consent are being considered as "men" by the CDC these days)

The red highlight is of some concern.
At 13 years old, boy or girl, they aren't adults and should not be deemed as such, especially in anything sexual.
One wonders if the left wing, for 'tis them that generally do this, are into ******* children, or if it's just misguided stupidity about being inclusive that allows older men to **** children.
For me, whatever type of sex between an adult and a child is less than acceptable for a wide variety of reasons.
Pretty much the same reasons apply to two kids having sex, with a few of those reasons left out as they don't apply.

That is exactly what KG is saying from the very beginning.

Yet some defenders of the gay agenda here pretend not to understand WHY the wording is disturbing.

and invent and reinvent the non-existent arguments to defend the horrid wording by CDC of these statistics.

 

[bodecea]

you are being DISHONEST here.

Where am I being dishonest?




Go back to the OP and read what she is claiming: "....that 13 year old boys being infected with HIV at an exponential rate".

Whether or not I think they are "important" is a strawman here. They are not being infected at an "exponential rate" they represent a tiny tiny group and a false claim by the OP.



They could be getting infected by 13 yr olds, or 14, 15,16 etc etc.

please, stop defend the homosexual rapists if you want to have some integrity remained.

I suggest you go back and READ and improve your reading comprehension skills before you start accusing anyone here of "defending" ANY kind of child rapists.

you can get infected by a newborn as well. if a newborn was infected by an adult beforehand.

the chance of getting infected by your peer is ZERO at the age of 13. or 14.

and 14-15 year olds are not getting it from their peers as well.

Stop pretending.
you know perfectly well that 13-14 year old boys do not get into HOMOSEXUAL relationships with their peers.
They have to be introduced into the practice by older men.

Actually, when I think of those statistics, I think they are most likely runaways in the street. That is a sad fact in America with both male and female runaways being caught up in the prostitution racket.

 

[Coyote]

I provided the link where the CDC refers to underaged boys who are being infected with HIV by older homosexuals as "men having sex with men".

So you are basing your entire claim on wording? That's it? No actual data behind it?

In this way they are able to hide the abuse of the boys, by lumping them in with men who actually ARE of age.

According to what data?

ACCORDING TO THE CDC...I HAVE ALREADY QUOTED IT AND LINKED IT. Cripes, quit asking the same thing over and over.

Big letters and bright colors doesn't alter the fact that what you are quoting doesn't support what you are claiming.

 

[Coyote]

I provided the link where the CDC refers to underaged boys who are being infected with HIV by older homosexuals as "men having sex with men".

So you are basing your entire claim on wording? That's it? No actual data behind it?

In this way they are able to hide the abuse of the boys, by lumping them in with men who actually ARE of age.

According to what data?

wording is EXTREMELY important.

and the data is exactly there - in the link and in your own graphs you have provided.

or are you stating that 13 and younger boys are being infected by HIV and STDs by their peers?

I'm stating this:

13 and younger is a incredibly tiny group - the exponential increase is in the 15-19 and 20-24. Do you disagree?

Amongst that group of 13 and younger - they *could* be infected by peers - 13 yr old could be infected by a 15 year old. They *could* be infected by older boys or by men. They could have gotten it through IVD or even prenatally. There is no info. None. Chances are - that at least some if not many were infected by sexual predators. I don't disagree with that - I'm only stating it's based on OPINION, not evidence.

The final thing I'm stating is that is an outright lie to use this evidence to make the claim that a TINY group of boys represents an EXPONENTIAL rate of HIV infection in the 13 and under group is due to some "homo lobby" willfully protecting child predators.

 

[tinydancer]

It's the grooming.

 

[tinydancer]

Bacha Bazi you groom the young boys this way.

 

[bodecea]

It's the grooming.

Hair? Nails?

 

[tinydancer]

Do any of you guys understand this?

 

[koshergrl]

So you are basing your entire claim on wording? That's it? No actual data behind it?

According to what data?

ACCORDING TO THE CDC...I HAVE ALREADY QUOTED IT AND LINKED IT. Cripes, quit asking the same thing over and over.

Big letters and bright colors doesn't alter the fact that what you are quoting doesn't support what you are claiming.

If that had actually happened, perhaps not.

The big letters and bright colors are so I don't have to tell you again who provided the information.

The CDC states that boys 13 years old are being increasingly infected with HIV. They have placed them into an age group (13-24) and have labeled them "men having sex with men" rather than placing them in an UNDERAGE demographic and properly labeling them as underaged boys being infected by homosexuals.

 

[koshergrl]

Do any of you guys understand this?

Yes, they understand it. That's why they make jokes about it, and try to change the subject, and lie about the information, and claim that the information that is irrefutable is evidence of a witch hunt.

 

[koshergrl]

It's the grooming.

Hair? Nails?

Grooming boys for pederasty is certainly amusing. I think you should make more jokes. That is certain to convince everybody that you aren't involved in covering for homosexual predators.

 

[tinydancer]

It's the grooming.

Hair? Nails?

How they groom the young boys. They are the dancing boys. It's a real deal bod. And you always have to remember that I do understand and realize that so many are. And that I have not a worry with this.

But the ones its forced upon?

 

[Coyote]

you are being DISHONEST here.

Where am I being dishonest?

Go back to the OP and read what she is claiming: "....that 13 year old boys being infected with HIV at an exponential rate".

Whether or not I think they are "important" is a strawman here. They are not being infected at an "exponential rate" they represent a tiny tiny group and a false claim by the OP.

They could be getting infected by 13 yr olds, or 14, 15,16 etc etc.

please, stop defend the homosexual rapists if you want to have some integrity remained.

I suggest you go back and READ and improve your reading comprehension skills before you start accusing anyone here of "defending" ANY kind of child rapists.

you can get infected by a newborn as well. if a newborn was infected by an adult beforehand.

the chance of getting infected by your peer is ZERO at the age of 13. or 14.

and 14-15 year olds are not getting it from their peers as well.

Stop pretending.
you know perfectly well that 13-14 year old boys do not get into HOMOSEXUAL relationships with their peers.
They have to be introduced into the practice by older men.

According to what data?

Do 13-14 yr old boys require an introduction by older women to begin heterosexual sex?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No, you have not, other than opined. Your evidence is not good.
.
And have you shown that heterosexual men who violate girls are not giving them STDs. Nope

Actually, you opined.

I provided evidence.

You provided no evidence.

Worse, you ignored evidence that ran counter to your claim.

Sorry, you lose again.

If you are interested in the violation of girls, I suggest you start a thread on that topic. It isn't the one the rest of us are discussing here.

Well, it's interesting to note that your concern starts and stops with homosexual child molesters. I'm sure all those child molesters of the heterosexual variety will rest easy knowing they get a free pass.

She’d be interested in child molesters of the heterosexual variety only if they’d serve her purpose of maligning gay Americans.

 

[tinydancer]

It's the grooming.

Hair? Nails?

Grooming boys for pederasty is certainly amusing. I think you should make more jokes. That is certain to convince everybody that you aren't involved in covering for homosexual predators.

When I learned about this, I lost it. I probably scared deer coyotes a wolf pack and elk.

I screamed so loud and ran thru the woods.