The Gay "Germ" Hypothesis

Awareness is potent etezete!

Once I am made aware of an error that I embody, I make asjustments to feel comfortable with myself again.

I believe the need within to make these adjustments are a natural mechanism of your sub conscious mind and body.
 
Thank you, Laura, for bringng this up. This is mind boggling and caught me with a question: Do you think that the germs alone can do this, or do you think that an aware person, infested with these germs, can counter that draught to homosexuality, promiscuity whatsoever. Through awareness. And that this person could take action and get rid of the germs and be "normal" again. Or do you think that if you have these germs then there is no getting out of this? Does that sound stupid? I hope not.

In addition to the high doses of vitamin C with DMSO in the intravenous drip as mentioned by Laura
I think It is also important to change your bad habits, diet, the environment and people you meet, what you think about, what you believe in. It is a multi-level work on oneself.

One can always start from something and observe changes that are going to occur
 
Well, that is going where the data leads, isn't it?

And that's pretty much what the Cs said.

Yeah. The other side of it is that I could have the 'germ', which they say also causes promiscuity, but I've also had a defect in a lumbar vertebrae that can compress nerve roots and has completely broken sometime before 2010 and that can cause numbness in the saddle area - so maybe the germ just doesn't work if I have it because of anatomical reasons and I haven't noticed it, outside of lumbar/sacral discomfort and pain, because of the gradual slip of the vertebrae out of position and increasing compression on the nerves. I don't know how early in life that impacted from, though I do recall times from around 11 years old where I would be laid out flat with lower back pain for a day or two.

Then of course there could be a germ that influences sexual abstinence!

Your comment seems to reflect a shocking degree of homophobia and inconsideration for gay members of this forum (i.e. "homo plague thingy," "strong homo force"), which is hard to excuse even if you were born that way: "Worse still, homophobia (or homoaversion, as it should properly called, according to Greg Cochran) is itself heritable, at least 54% so. Yes, homophobes were much more “born that way” than homosexuals themselves!"

My take on what Cochran was saying is that homophobia might be a product of a detection of the 'germ' on some level and attempts to protect from catching it - so that could be what Yozilla's reaction is about.

The interesting question that comes to mind is that I wonder if homophobes have the genetic weakness that allows the germ to impact and so they can over react? It's strange though because from what I understand the only way it can be passed between human beings is from mother to baby. So that may be one of the 'imprint' windows that the C's have mentioned.
 
Even the term "homofobia" seems to be coined with some hidden agenda - like somebody is vewy vewy afwaid of gays, instead just being not so enthusiastic about there ways... Maybe homocritic could be better term instead...😱
 
Thank you, Laura, for bringng this up. This is mind boggling and caught me with a question: Do you think that the germs alone can do this, or do you think that an aware person, infested with these germs, can counter that draught to homosexuality, promiscuity whatsoever. Through awareness. And that this person could take action and get rid of the germs and be "normal" again. Or do you think that if you have these germs then there is no getting out of this? Does that sound stupid? I hope not.

The thing is I think even managing to recognise that you've been infected by a germ would be hard. I mean, let's say you're into porn or perhaps, you have no issue with cheating. You might be inclined to think of it as some sort of "thinking error" or a sort of "weakness" that needs to be controlled with willpower. But then, perhaps your "weakness" is germ based or perhaps it's something else? This would need to be decided too, wouldn't it? Also, perhaps these germs might not originate with you but with your parents/ grandparents and perhaps due to environmental factor/ stress/ interaction with other element of your system, they could activate specific behaviour in you that would not be there under other circumstances. Perhaps, I'm thinking in circles.

I think, ultimately it boils down to how much control do we have as human beings and how much of our lives is decided by outside forces. Then, I suppose the next question would be whether we can be rid of these outside forces if they are truly here or if we cannot hope to be more than what we are and simply need to wait for death. It's fascinating, but utterly depressing too.
 
It is interesting in view of the latest "study" released to the media on the so-called "gay-gene": No ‘gay gene’: Massive study homes in on genetic basis of human sexuality
Ganna and his colleagues also used the analysis to estimate that up to 25% of sexual behaviour can be explained by genetics, with the rest influenced by environmental and cultural factors — a figure similar to the findings of smaller studies.
and also How do genes affect same-sex behavior? (the paper is open access)
Since these genes only predict sexual preference in a limited fashion, they may as well be considered as a "predisposition", maybe facilitating other effects like the pathogens.
 
Last edited:
I can also comment to the amount of promiscuity in the gay community - my experience more directly with females though tales of the males were common, and I didn't hear about females 'working the beat' as the males did. I used to find the amount of bed hopping and cheating on partners distasteful - where you have that thing about there being seven degrees of connection socially, I reckon in the gay community and where sex is concerned that would be more like 1 or 2 degrees of connection - every one that you meet has slept with someone that you've slept with or someone that they've slept with!

That's all more understandable if there's a germ that driving it - and how would they know that it's a germ infection that's driving it? There's not much socially these days to discourage promiscuity so it probably wouldn't be questioned.

In any case, I think it's a good reason for afflicted gays to refrain from adopting or raising children because regularly swapping partners would negatively impact home life and could be disturbing for children.

I think, ultimately it boils down to how much control do we have as human beings and how much of our lives is decided by outside forces. Then, I suppose the next question would be whether we can be rid of these outside forces if they are truly here or if we cannot hope to be more than what we are and simply need to wait for death. It's fascinating, but utterly depressing too.

In the thread that started this discussion, the topic was that behaviour is genetically based and that nurture has little impact. Gives a whole new level of meaning to 'paying all in advance' in the work, the small and large accumulators, how it's possible to die, though not likely when a small accumulator is drained and until the small accumulator can refill from the large accumulator etc. and how difficult it could be to change behaviours from vices to virtues!
: Albion's Seed and much more
 
Q: (L) And I would say it has been from the beginning. We're talking about long, slow, patient manipulation. The C's said it years ago. It's to get everybody programmed to be the way they want them to be when they come to take over so that we'll all be "worthy" subjects. It's creepy.
(Joe) Is that in any way connected to homosexuality?
A: Yes
Q: (Joe) Is homosexuality a deliberate tinkering with humanity that is a reflection of a 4D STS mindset?
A: Yes
Q: (Niall) Is 4D STS gay?
A: No. It is about power not sex.

The other thing that comes to mind is that apart from being a CIA program, individuals in the LGBT community itself, with this germ theory in mind, may be directing the latest social impacts for their own need for power and control. That really explains why the movement seems to have little regard for the rights of children or straight adults and so many changes that are coming in just totally disregard those rights.
 
The premise which is a pillar of this hypothesis:
“ It doesn’t exist in most hunter-gatherers: you have to explain what it is you’re even talking about when you ask them. Presumably with diagrams.” Is not true at least according to the attached paper, if you look at the map with historical evidence for distribution of homosexuality amongst most hunter gatherer groups worldwide this is clearly not the case.
Also - it’s virtually impossible to disprove or prove homosexuality existed in preagricultural societies:
“Indeed, the existence of MHP in past times can never be proved or disproved using only archaeological remains: written texts are required to establish that homosexual preference was eventually present, and this information is probably definitively inaccessible for prehistoric (e.g., before written texts) societies. ”

 
Even the term "homofobia" seems to be coined with some hidden agenda - like somebody is vewy vewy afwaid of gays, instead just being not so enthusiastic about there ways... Maybe homocritic could be better term instead...😱

I can't be sure of course, but I'd say the vast majority of of heterosexual men (at least in Western countries) are not homophobic (in the way that term is used i.e. some kind of militant and overt anti-gay attitude) but have a biologically-instantiated aversion to homosexuality that they keep under control out of respect for others. A strict reading of the word homophobia is a fair enough from this point of view, it's a similar instinctive aversion to arachnaphobia for example. It's should not to be condemned or 'shamed' out of people any more than other natural phobias. The issue is one of respect for other people while drawing a line at certain personal boundaries.
 
Maori could be used as an example of preagricultural society and also very isolated one - Maori language has specific word for devoted partner of the same sex and there are historical records from early settlers that homosexuality amongst Maori wasn’t frowned upon.

 
I can't be sure of course, but I'd say the vast majority of of heterosexual men (at least in Western countries) are not homophobic (in the way that term is used i.e. some kind of militant and overt anti-gay attitude) but have a biologically-instantiated aversion to homosexuality that they keep under control out of respect for others. A strict reading of the word homophobia is a fair enough from this point of view, it's a similar instinctive aversion to arachnaphobia for example. It's should not to be condemned or 'shamed' out of people any more than other natural phobias. The issue is one of respect for other people while drawing a line at certain personal boundaries.

Come on Yozilla - the difference between homophobia and “not being enthusiastic about their ways “ is the “Ubij ubij pedera ( Kill Kill that faggot )” attitude vs. “Umkay whatever floats your boat as long as it doesn’t involve me”.
For example your previous comment on this thread can be described as text book example homophobic OSIT.
 
Back
Top Bottom