Sports Illustrated Puts Another Mentally Ill Dude In a Bikini On the Cover

[Curried Goats]

I'm arguing only heterosexuality is the default and others are deviances from that default. Or words made up to futher balkanize us into smaller and smaller groups each fighting for the top of the pity pole.

Then you are arguing purpose. Random chance doesn't have a default.

They exist, but they are not the default, and that has no moral judgement against them.

It's the default for their species.

I don't care about your morals, I'm questioning whether you have a rational explanation for purpose.

 

[martybegan]

Then you are arguing purpose. Random chance doesn't have a default.

I don't care about your morals, I'm questioning whether you have a rational explanation for purpose.

Random chance that results in a set organism has a default.

This is just a proxy for you trying to justify your morals with "science", same way the idiots did with skull measurements.

 

[Curried Goats]

Random chance that results in a set organism has a default.

No it doesn't. Random chance and evolution don't ever stop.

This is just a proxy for you trying to justify your morals with "science", same way the idiots did with skull measurements.

I haven't mentioned morals, you keep mentioning them. I don't need morality to argue biology and evolution.

 

[martybegan]

No it doesn't. Random chance and evolution don't ever stop.

I haven't mentioned morals, you keep mentioning them. I don't need morality to argue biology and evolution.

Evolution is gradual, and if we evolve to all be homosexual we evolve to go extinct.

You try to use arguments like this as a proxy for morality, much like the southerners before the civil war trying to justify slavery as moral because of biology.

 

[Curried Goats]

Evolution is gradual, and if we evolve to all be homosexual we evolve to go extinct.

The genes and hormones that work to give rise to homosexuality among sexually reproducing organisms probably existed before humans did.

You try to use arguments like this as a proxy for morality, much like the southerners before the civil war trying to justify slavery as moral because of biology.

These are all bad arguments. If you want to argue science then produce scientific arguments.

Your comments above reinforce the notion that you think life has a purpose. You think evolution exists to help organisms survive and that the goal is to avoid extinction. This isn't how life or evolution works.

 

[martybegan]

The genes and hormones that work to give rise to homosexuality among sexually reproducing organisms probably existed before humans did.

There are all bad arguments. If you want to argue science then produce scientific arguments.

Your comments above reinforce the notion that you think life has a purpose. You think evolution exists to help organisms survive and that the goal is to avoid extinction. This isn't how life or evolution works.

That's only for the nature argument, not the nurture argument, and one isn't exclusive to the other before you bring that response up.

Again, I'm not a nihilist like you. Processes have a purpose, regardless of origination from intent or randomness.

Sorry, I don't get my learning from Youtube.

 

[marvin martian]

Or what fake tough guy? You'll cry harder?

I'll tell your boyfriend.

 

[Curried Goats]

That's only for the nature argument, not the nurture argument, and one isn't exclusive to the other before you bring that response up.

Are you making a nurture argument or just alluding to one? If so let's hear it.

Again, I'm not a nihilist like you.

That just a pejorative. It has no relevance to arguments about biology or evolution.

Processes have a purpose, regardless of origination from intent or randomness.

Sorry, I don't get my learning from Youtube.

Sorry but you can't have it both ways. Evolution is either random or it is purposeful. Which is it? Or if you think it switches describe the mechanism that caused this switch. You can't. You don't even have arguments you have statements you don't try to prove with evidence or facts.

As the short video tried to explain to you evolution doesn't exist to help organisms avoid extinction. That would imply purpose. It uses the examples of giraffes by explaining that they didn't evolve longer and longer necks in order to reach higher and higher leaves, instead longer necks were a random mutation and the presence of tall trees allowed those organism with that mutation to survive. If all the tall trees died out or hadn't existed the organisms with that mutation would of died out and nature wouldn't of given a shit.

 

[Curried Goats]

I'll tell your boyfriend.

Sounds about all a little ***** like you would be capable of.

 

[martybegan]

Are you making a nurture argument or just alluding to one? If so let's hear it.

That just a pejorative. It has no relevance to arguments about biology or evolution.

Sorry but you can't have it both ways. Evolution is either random or it is purposeful. Which is it? Or if you think it switches describe the mechanism that caused this switch. You can't. You don't even have arguments you have statements you don't try to prove with evidence or facts.

As the short video tried to explain to you evolution doesn't exist to help organisms avoid extinction. That would imply purpose. It uses the examples of giraffes by explaining that they didn't evolve longer and longer necks in order to reach higher and higher leaves, instead longer necks were a random mutation and the presence of tall trees allowed those organism with that mutation to survive. If all the tall trees died out or hadn't existed the organisms with that mutation would of died out and nature wouldn't of given a shit.

It could be both, or one for one person and the other for another. We have a habit of trying to bunch everything into neat little binary systems or absolute answers when it isn't the case.

It's my response to your worldview, and my dismissal of it.

Again with trying to make things fit into neat little holes. Part can be random, and the result can be purposeful, and something purposeful can have a randomized element added to it to change the purpose, for good or bad.

You are mistaking purpose for willful design or intent.

 

[Curried Goats]

It could be both, or one for one person and the other for another. We have a habit of trying to bunch everything into neat little binary systems or absolute answers when it isn't the case.

It's my response to your worldview, and my dismissal of it.

Again with trying to make things fit into neat little holes. Part can be random, and the result can be purposeful, and something purposeful can have a randomized element added to it to change the purpose, for good or bad.

You are mistaking purpose for willful design or intent.

What are you even saying anymore guy? It could be this it could be that it could be anything is a far cry from heterosexuality is the default. What a retreat by you.

 

[marvin martian]

Sounds about all a little ***** like you would be capable of.

When he finds out, he's going to make you wear the dress for a while instead.

LOL

 

[Curried Goats]

When he finds out, he's going to make you wear the dress for a while instead.

LOL

I love how your version of being a tough guy is writing online gay fanfiction.

 

[martybegan]

What are you even saying anymore guy? It could be this it could be that it could be anything is a far cry from heterosexuality is the default. What a retreat by you.

Sorry you can't keep up with the conversation.

It was going so well there for a while, but I guess the Hello Kitty Message Board may be more your speed.

 

[Curried Goats]

Sorry you can't keep up with the conversation.

Not your wishy washy arguments.

It was going so well there for a while, but I guess the Hello Kitty Message Board may be more your speed.

Your angry deflections only make it more apparent that you don't have rational arguments.

 

[Polishprince]

If Sports Illustrated wants to put a dude in a bikini on its swimsuit edition, that's their own affair.

But they shouldn't call Normal people names like "transphobe" if they are repelled by the thought and don't want to buy it.

 

[Curried Goats]

If Sports Illustrated wants to put a dude in a bikini on its swimsuit edition, that's their own affair.

But they shouldn't call Normal people names like "transphobe" if they are repelled by the thought and don't want to buy it.

Feel free to cry about it if it bothers you.

 

[BackAgain]

Sports Illustrated just begged Americans to Bud Light them by putting a delusional psycho on the cover of the swimsuit edition. I guess they did this back in 2021 too.
SI does 4 separate swimsuit covers & the another one for this year actually has 81 year old Martha Stewart.
What red blooded male doesn't want to see a dude in drag & an octogenarian as bikini models?

At this point in the transanity & general societal meltdown, none of this surprises me anymore. The inmates are running the asylum & trying to force their mental illnesses on the rest of us.
I haven't seen a SI in years & this attack on women & sanity isn't going to help them.
In fact, it will just speed their own demise, just like Bud Light did.



And to think they would like nothing more than to outlaw calling them out for their lies, derangements & insanity.
View attachment 786046

That dude is not an attractive looking fake female. Couldn’t even fool old Eddie Murphy.

 

[martybegan]

Not your wishy washy arguments.

Your angry deflections only make it more apparent that you don't have rational arguments.

My arguments are sound, you just don't like arguing against someone who sees your bullshit for what it is.

Now how is Hello Kitty angry?

 

[marvin martian]

I love how your version of being a tough guy is writing online gay fanfiction.

^^^Says the guy ******* another guy in a dress. OK, "bro"...

LOL