The Gay "Germ" Hypothesis

[Jacques]

What an interesting discussion.

For me, these sentences sum up the discussion very well:

You're gay, I'm fat; you can hide being gay, I can never hide being fat; think about that for a bit.

So the first order of business is for people to just freaking accept who and what they are right down to the mechanics of the genetic body, and learn what is necessary to deal with that.

How can you live life as a gay/homosexual/queer/whatever person in the BEST way imaginable? How can you make your life count not only for yourself, your personal growth, but for others and most significantly, for the Universe itself?

I don't think that the problem is all that different from my own if you think about it. Question is: what will you do about it?

The objective is this: at the end of life, when you are released from the "bonds that hold you fast", you can stand in judgment of yourself without shame at time or energy wasted. The only thing you can take out of this life is the love and care and efforts that you GIVE AWAY.

And if you happen to be gay while fulfilling such a program, so the heck what? It should not define you in any way; it's PRIVATE.

 

[Joe]

There's nuance here that's completely absent from the discussion because 'thou shalt not discuss sexuality on the forum.' Or 'thy tone must be perfect to avoid the dog-pile.'

Obviously there's no injunction against discussing sexuality on the forum, so that's just nonsense. As for tone, no one demands perfection, but a lot can be read from the words people use and the context in which they use them.

I take issue with the fact that you made a joke about 'stretching it' that was totally tolerated and used 'graphic descriptions' of putting a shotgun in someone's rear, and I say 'butt sex' and the collective pearls get clutched and I'm openly psychoanalyzed.

Yeah, that was an obvious joke, a bit silly, but a joke, actually in an attempt to lighten the atmosphere a bit and perhaps encourage people to be more open. But it was a joke. You used the term "butt sex" in a non-joking, straight up serious way. It wasn't a big issue, and there was not clutching of pearls, it just highlighted your tendency to use childish language in a serious context, which is VERY different from me making an obvious joke. And yet you conflate the two. Also, I used the analogy of the proper and improper use of a hunting rifle, not a shotgun (no idea why you substituted that) to illustrate a point in response to a comment by someone else. The fact that the analogy was relevant to the topic was just a bonus.

I'm not craving anyone's approval here and have no problem speaking thoughts I believe to be true, the same can not be said for many folks in this discussion and the double standard is rather obvious.

Only to you, because you're having a hard time controlling your emotions over this topic.

The CIA also did a number on the heterosexuals during the Lavender Scare, which is where much of modern homophobic attitudes originated. It seems impossible for some heterosexuals to not-have homophobic or prudish chips on their shoulder and it's equally impossible for them to remove it, especially when they rationalize the attitudes and shut down discussion.

Don't you think it's strange that the only one who has expressed a feeling of having the conversation "shut down" is you? And that that includes several gay members? Or maybe they're all brainwashed, and you're the only one who sees things objectively here?

 

[PhoenixToEmber]

Well, you know what our take on the not-so-distant future is (even if it's only a pretty decent theory at this point). So in your position (and honestly, we are all in that same position of wondering where we should stand in the face current events on the planet and what, if anything, we should do), the most perspicacious approach, IMO, is to wait, watch and see what happens. It's like hedging your bets, or 'Pascal's wager'. And let's be honest, there is more than little evidence that there is a decent chance of something along the lines of what we think might be in the offing actually coming about. So we're not talking about some kind of delusional or blind belief that runs totally counter to observable reality.

Happy Birthday btw!

Keeping my eyes peeled is the plan. I've studied at least enough history by now to know just how quickly a situation can change, and how drastically; how evil can build up under the surface and then suddenly explode, and the next thing you know we're in Pompeii (metaphorically speaking).

And thank you for the birthday wish.

 

[Glenn]

All of it is just so confusing. It's not easy to navigate, and my feelings are always conflicted about being a gay man wondering about where I should stand in all of this, where it's heading in the wider picture.

I think having the big picture, that these movements, (gay, feminist, racial etc.) have been co opted by the PTB, can act as a grounding point. I like to try and strip away all the crap surrounding these issues, and try to see them with clearer eyes. I see that what is pushed by the media, and it's so called experts, is pretty much opposite what should be done. And I think their agenda could end up with pretty terrifying outcomes as things deteriorate, as the shoving it in your face approach probably will end up with serious blowback.



And it is very likely that all the oppression of said groups was controlled and manufactured as well, to set up the situation we see today.

 

[PhoenixToEmber]

Don't you think it's strange that the only one who has expressed a feeling of having the conversation "shut down" is you? And that that includes several gay members? Or maybe they're all brainwashed, and you're the only one who sees things objectively here?

Actually, to be fair here, etezete expressed having that same feeling toward my first post, which we resolved was a misunderstanding.

 

[Seamus]

Either that or an insane asylum. He's clearly mentally ill and needs help. And if he can't be helped, people need to be protected from him.

That would be another good solution if all the insane asylums weren't closed!

I don't think there are many people alive who would not be to some extent, shocked, perturbed, disturbed, feel awkward or just 'averse' in some way to two people (of whatever orientation) passionately kissing or 'making out' in public. This appears to be a hard-wired FACT that spans all cultures and probably all times and amounts to an unwritten law. Given this FACT, I can't understand how any gay person could not stop and think about 'gay culture' (including gay pride parades and what they often represent) that obviously seeks to willfully, flagrantly and publicly flout this 'law'. Sure, the narrative is that this is done because of oppression and intolerance, but that STILL doesn't make the deliberate and public rebeling against this universal public injunction AGAINST that type of behavior, a good idea.

Peterson talks about Openness to Experience (I think you mentioned that a few pages back) from the Big 5 Personality test being a predictor for a liberal political point of view (Big Five personality traits - Wikipedia, Understand Myself - What You Need to Know) so my guess is that LGBTQ folks probably tend to have high openness scores. People with a higher openness to experience score are more "willing to try new things", "more likely to hold unconventional beliefs" and "more likely to engage in risky behavior or drug taking". There are a bunch of positive aspects to a high score as well and I'm guessing many people here have high openness scores, but my point is that people who are open to experience are less likely to be shocked, perturbed, disturbed, or feel awkward or averse in general.

Many of the LGBTQ folks I know got involved in "gay culture" when they were teenagers and young adults and it became part of their identity. Teenagers get caught up in social movements for a variety of reasons (wanting to fit in, rebel against their family/society, be a good person, etc) and don't think about the fact that they might be pawns in a bigger game. Identifying with a group is also a big part of liberal identity. Repeated exposure to triggers causes desensitization, so if someone is more open/less averse to something in the first place and everyone in the group they identify with is into it that could explain how someone could not only lose their aversion but have a hard time understanding why everyone else has a problem.

 

[Andrian]

Thank you Laura for opening this thread, I've learned something new so i'm grateful to you and to all who participated in this thread.

Though what i took home from all this thread is Joe's comment (especially the bolder part):

The other problem is that there is a lot of social credit offered to homosexuals that are 'loud and proud' these days, and that's a draw. I'd really like to think that most gay members of this forum would have enough knowledge, awareness and control to resist that kind of thing, for the most part, and at least not defend it or advocate for it. The same goes for non-gay members, there are lots of attractions and distractions available to all of that we have to navigate. So there is nothing being asked here of gay members that does not, in general, apply to all.

As a related aside, the general idea of the Cs teaching etc. is that we are all meant to be in the process of pursuing the goal of making ourselves into some kind of 'conduits' for a certain type of 'energy' that will play an important role in the not-too-distant future. That process seems to, in general, involve removing to the greatest extent possible, our immersion in materialism and self-centeredness. Just thought I'd mention that as a philosophical context into which to place all of this.

It doesn't matter you are heterosexual or homosexual, what matters is Who you are and Who you want to BE. The sexual desire is the thing it got us all in this mess, the primordial sin, the desire to experience the physical reality, it's the thing we'll have to overcome naturally by doing our homework If we want to get out of this mess, so by zooming out and looking at all this from this point of view all i can see is that Wasting one own's energy by letting to bee emotionally heavily identified with

one own's ​

sexual orientation it won't help you grow and Do the Work, on the contrary, it will distract you, will consume your thoughts will make you waste your energy and time for NOTHING.

Just my take on it...

 

[PhoenixToEmber]

Peterson talks about Openness to Experience (I think you mentioned that a few pages back) from the Big 5 Personality test being a predictor for a liberal political point of view (Big Five personality traits - Wikipedia, Understand Myself - What You Need to Know) so my guess is that LGBTQ folks probably tend to have high openness scores. People with a higher openness to experience score are more "willing to try new things", "more likely to hold unconventional beliefs" and "more likely to engage in risky behavior or drug taking". There are a bunch of positive aspects to a high score as well and I'm guessing many people here have high openness scores, but my point is that people who are open to experience are less likely to be shocked, perturbed, disturbed, or feel awkward or averse in general.

That's my most dominant trait - exceptionally high in both subcategories (Intellect 94%, I believe - and Trait Openess, 98%), actually. Oddly enough, that did not translate much into my sex life at all or even drug-taking (never did anything "extreme" in either of those areas). What it did play into, though, is that I love to read both fiction and non-fiction almost equally; painting; writing poetry; playing drums; trying my hand at various creative things like cooking, woodcutting, etc. etc. Makes me love museums, libraries, films, live music, culture - it's the root of being obsessively curious, in both a creative and intellectual way.

Many of the LGBTQ folks I know got involved in "gay culture" when they were teenagers and young adults and it became part of their identity. Teenagers get caught up in social movements for a variety of reasons (wanting to fit in, rebel against their family/society, be a good person, etc) and don't think about the fact that they might be pawns in a bigger game. Identifying with a group is also a big part of liberal identity. Repeated exposure to triggers causes desensitization, so if someone is more open/less averse to something in the first place and everyone in the group they identify with is into it that could explain how someone could not only lose their aversion but have a hard time understanding why everyone else has a problem.

See, this didn't happen to me. The culture I was immersed in as a teenager growing up was mostly my local music scene, which was a mix of all races and sexualities (although predominantly straight) and our identities revolved mostly around our instruments and our craft. There are no gay bars in Elizabeth or anything like that really - no "scene" - everyone just goes to Manhattan for that. But the only reason I would ever go to Manhattan as a teenager and in college was to go to a concert, a museum, or a bookstore. lol I don't really like bars and I rarely drink. Perhaps this is why I feel so different than a lot of "LGBT" people I meet.

 

[NewEngland Seeker]

• One can have a happy and healthy life without orgasms.
• One cannot have a happy or healthy life without exercise and work.
• Once cannot have a divine life if focused on the pleasures of the lower half of the body.

A theory why homosexuality is condemned by God:
From “Egyptian Book of the Dead - 42 Negative Confessions” there is one of the confessions that states: Hail, Qerrti, who comest forth from Amentet, I have not committed adultery, I have not lain with men. Link to original web page

The humans that have the blood of the Annunaki or the god ordained rulers of men needed to keep their genetic line pure. They needed to maintain proper procreation standards so anything that interfered with this was condemned. Homosexuality was a death knell to the bloodline, so it was condemned. However, lesbianism did not interfere with the bloodline since the woman could still be impregnated and thus the bloodline would continue. Those who were not of the blue blood were not of any concern of God, so this sin only pertains to the blue bloods.



Viruses are the likely suspect:

Viruses are like alien drones or bio-portals for hyper dimensional attachments. There could easily be hundreds of thousands different homosexual bio-portals just as there are computer viruses in the dark web. To complicate matters the infectious trait could be a small part of a common virus and only is activated in individuals that are susceptible. Thus, the individual can be infected anytime from conception on until the sexual preference has been solidified.

 

[Laura]

<snip>
A theory why homosexuality is condemned by God:
From “Egyptian Book of the Dead - 42 Negative Confessions” there is one of the confessions that states: Hail, Qerrti, who comest forth from Amentet, I have not committed adultery, I have not lain with men. Link to original web page

The humans that have the blood of the Annunaki or the god ordained rulers of men needed to keep their genetic line pure. They needed to maintain proper procreation standards so anything that interfered with this was condemned. Homosexuality was a death knell to the bloodline, so it was condemned. However, lesbianism did not interfere with the bloodline since the woman could still be impregnated and thus the bloodline would continue. Those who were not of the blue blood were not of any concern of God, so this sin only pertains to the blue bloods.
<snip>

It's really hard to see how homosexuality can be a "death knell" to a bloodline since it does not result in procreation. So I would say that this Annunaki idea is a load of nonsense.

However, what is interesting is that the aversion to homosexuality was so clearly expressed in ancient Egypt and perhaps they were aware that it very often leads to STDs and worse?

Going back to Gaby's post about STDs several pages back, it is surprising to see one branch of social authorities so up in arms about STDs while another branch is pushing and promoting "sexual fluidity", which is almost guaranteed to increase the spread of same in the population.

Going back to the "theory" that opened the thread, the "Gay Germ" thing, it seems to me that it is just some hardcore Darwinist types trying to come up with something to save Darwinism when homosexuality is actually much better explained by Design Theory.

 

[luc]

That's my most dominant trait - exceptionally high in both subcategories (Intellect 94%, I believe - and Trait Openess, 98%), actually. Oddly enough, that did not translate much into my sex life at all or even drug-taking (never did anything "extreme" in either of those areas). What it did play into, though, is that I love to read both fiction and non-fiction almost equally; painting; writing poetry; playing drums; trying my hand at various creative things like cooking, woodcutting, etc. etc. Makes me love museums, libraries, films, live music, culture - it's the root of being obsessively curious, in both a creative and intellectual way.

PtE, just a general comment: please stop trying to impress us here with how positive and great you are compared to other gays. It's really transparent and doesn't help. You be your own judge. I get the feeling that in your mind everything resolves around you, which is not a healthy thing. If I understood correctly, Laura called you a "six year old" earlier. This should give you some food for thought!

Actually, to be fair here, etezete expressed having that same feeling toward my first post, which we resolved was a misunderstanding.

Another manifestation of "everything's about you" - arguing about irrelevant things just to show us you "have been right". You realize that these things are totally obvious?

I think a whole new world could open up to you if you practice thinking about others, about their perspectives, what might be helpful for them, and try to put yourself in others' shoes.

Going back to the "theory" that opened the thread, the "Gay Germ" thing, it seems to me that it is just some hardcore Darwinist types trying to come up with something to save Darwinism when homosexuality is actually much better explained by Design Theory.

Good point! Homosexuality totally runs counter Darwinism. Darwinian thinking is such a mess, I wouldn't be surprised if someone came up with a "hero germ", because self-sacrifice is a complete non-starter in the Darwinian world!

 

[nature]

I don't think there are many people alive who would not be to some extent, shocked, perturbed, disturbed, feel awkward or just 'averse' in some way to two people (of whatever orientation) passionately kissing or 'making out' in public. This appears to be a hard-wired FACT that spans all cultures and probably all times and amounts to an unwritten law. Given this FACT, I can't understand how any gay person could not stop and think about 'gay culture' (including gay pride parades and what they often represent) that obviously seeks to willfully, flagrantly and publicly flout this 'law'. Sure, the narrative is that this is done because of oppression and intolerance, but that STILL doesn't make the deliberate and public rebeling against this universal public injunction AGAINST that type of behavior, a good idea.

In fact, homo community is not homogeneous. The problem is in the creation of a "community". When there are disturbed (and disturbing) people in a group, like pathocratic ones, the whole group goes to chaos and infect the sane elements. There are bad people everywhere, in every country, in every races, in every groups.
In gay community, there is a minority of pathologic individuals but with their narratives, rhetorics, nice words (egality etc) they drive all others. Exactly the same thing as in other domains, like the SJWs stuff.
Most of layman gays are conditionned; they consider gay pride as the unique opportunity to be heard, to change things towards their acceptance. I even heard a gay parson say "I don't like grotesque parades in gayprides but I go there because it has helped to recognize homosexual marriage" or "I go there because it's a mean to encounter a new partner" (!) or "because I love the atmosphere of feast".
See this thread about Rio's carnival: the same goes for majority of people (whatever sexual orientation)

 

[nature]

So, finally it's not a problem of being gay or not, it's a problem of humans: being able to detach oneself, to see the whole picture. There are some homo who don't mix with the community, live in discretion, don't like gaypride parades. It's a matter of being, not of sexual orientation.
Of course, things like cia will exploit social rejection of a community, to divide even more, to generate hatred.
And also, crooked or even psychopath people exist everywhere, among gays too, so they give a bad image of gay people in general, particularly when there are pedophile ones among them.

And yes I agree with you Joe; conditionned gay people will win - both for their individual life, for their spirit and for the "community" itself - if they are able to see that identification to the community will kill them (in all plans).
Same for every type of community every time they are not vigilant, let malignant people think for them.

I don't like the notion of "community", it's something that blinds its members and makes them make things they will not commit otherwise. We see it also in religious communities, political communities etc.

 

[Joe]

Laura called you a "six year old" earlier.

I think that was in reference to Cyre.

 

[luc]

I think that was in reference to Cyre.

Oh, my apologies!