Can someone help me disprove that "half of britain's teenagers are not hetero" article?
When I give my cuckfriend statistics that show the traditional number of 1-2% of the population being gay, he says that sexuality is fluid and that "this kind of gay" is just on the far right spectrum from the leftmost (he calls it theoretical) end of being pure straight to complete homosexual.
So his argument is now that people who don't want to be associated with being gay are now maybe not okay with completly coming out, but saying so in their statistics.
I just said how even if that is true and most people are in between those "two extremes", why that even matters, if they never practically act on that. Or they maybe are just a few percentage points divergent from "the extreme" (which should be called norm).
I mean can you really call a person not straight anymore, just because he is a 1 instead of a 0 on the kensey scale or whatever else you try to measure sexuality with?
What about a 0,2 does that mean that you are okay with fucking girls, but are fine with giving guys long hugs?
Sure yes. I mean I think there is quite a big difference for people who are into passing traps and want to fuck them like they're women and people who would suck that "feminine" penis and are into pegging. (last one still counts as straight though ???)
Samuel Mitchell
Just tell to him that evolutionary it would be illogical that majority of people would have that kind of sexuality. And by that I mean this: Evolutionary speaking the genes that reproduce the most are the next generation "winning" genes, right? So, over time and time again, those genes that are unable to reproduce will have lower possibility of ever being represented in future. This we could look at today, or in past as the number of gays that have passed on their genes has been small during the time of recorded history, in contrast to normal hetero relationships, and only small percentage of overall gays have reproduced. This means that going in future the gays will continue to shrink in numbers, merely out of evolution. Seeing how there are millions of years of evolution behind us from last creature that ever walked it would be illogical how there are gays on the Earth because of the logical explanation before. Meaning that there is no way that gays today would be in double digit percentage of population, let alone a natural "born gay" possibility. The only logical explanation for these high numbers that your friend is proposing is however a matter of environmental factors. Either a lot of hormonal imbalance before birth or just pure propaganda that made a lot of these people "bisexual" even when you look at the statistics of these "bisexuals" you see that a lot of them just don't want to have sex with same sex.
Carter Peterson
Kensley scale however is just a complete misunderstanding by (((psychology))). It doesn't represent dysgenical outlook of western civilization that already had eliminated all of the outside threats and dangers. Sure, seeing how K selective theory sees the white people and with that you can see it through out the diversity of hair colors and eye colors of white people, humans and especially white people love "diversity" in their sexual preferences. This means that a lot of Helga, big, muscly, big tits, 12 bear carrying women will get passed on and a lot of scrawny cucks too, but that doesn't mean that natural selection has been completely eliminated or that Kensley scale represents the reality of situation. The genes for mating desires is still there, no matter how they might be fucked in wanting to look at feminine males or masculine females.
Cameron Collins
There you go, hope you get more verbose in your oratory skillz fagget. Git gud or go home.
Angel Reed
...
Levi Scott
Anyone who seriously believe that is beyond help. I don't remember fapping a single fucking time while fantasizing on someone from my own sex. Most of the time they were feminine submissive women.
I remember those articles that said that hetero women didn't exist, it was only lesbian and bi women. Comments were 100% filled with women laughing at the article.
No thanks.
Nicholas Gonzalez
He actually belives that. And that gays in the past just married, because it was custom and women were oppressed and just given to men. Arranged marriages and all.
Also he said that there is still a lot of homophobia which oppresses people who are "sexually fluid" from coming out even today.
And he said that an increase in non-hetero sexuality is nature's population control, since people who have a lot of brothers have a higher chance at being gay (apparently idk where the hell he got that from).
Mate I don't think you would have fared better. His argument he always comes back on is that people are now with less homophobia more ready to "explore" sex with the same gender, without being mad fun of.
I wanted to ask him if he wanted to do that, but I didn't want to make it that personal. lol
Aiden Jones
I got him to admit that this statistic doesn't represent reality accurately and that the number might be lower, but he still has a "feeling" that it definetly is more than just 5% and some form of bisexuality or homosexuality is there in ~25% of the population.
Jaxon Wood
You can't because if you're not "100% hetero" then you're not "hetro" and since it is doubleplusungood to be 100% hetero at least half of all British teenagers will say that they are at least 1% gay.
Similarly, in the 90s the hip thing to say was "I'm in touch with my feminine side." It's circular reasoning and you're best not to engage in debate about it.
Gavin Phillips
Give him stats how most of bisexuals don't want to have sex with same gender. That will convince him.
Pessants, cavemen and orangutans having arranged marriages? wait what?
In Sweden there isn't but still LGBT community is having high numbers of suicide there. Just bait him on him complimenting Swedens tolerance to LGBT then give him the twist to saying how LGBT community is still killing themselves in vast numbers regardless of culture and try to hint it being a mental illness and how there are same percentage of schizos.
LOL no. Sure, degeneracy is caused by care free western society but it isn't the nature's population control because there is nothing natural about degeneracy. It's just a product of danger free, feel good, "nobody is winning and nobody is loosing" culture with a lot of environmental factors that will cause it. You can always argue how your baseball bat is really good nature's population control and you still have enough hope for future and decency not to use it on skulls of faggots.
That is because of mothers hormones inside of a womb. You can explain it the same way as "overworking your car engine for 6 days straight and then expecting the same kind of performance on 7th". Of course the 7th kid will be extremely feminine after mother produces 6 guys packed to brim with testosterone.
Everyone who's in debating circles know this basic info.
Statistics tell otherwise. A lot of these "explorers" just go back and they look back. That is just an effect of someone disregarding his/hers natural instinct and believing the lies and propaganda and "seeing how it is". Seriously, his arguments are working against him…
His arguments are purely on emotional level. The way you argue lefties is not with logic but with emotion. Seeing how most lefties put social acceptance on high regard, you bring your whole group in and destroy him like a pack of wolves. You shame him into obedience and make that little sissy cry until he wants to commit suicide like most LGBT.
Anthony Cox
I just noticed without being mad fun of.
Funny eh?
Juan King
And then faggots turned out to be 0.8%, maximum.
Noah Green
but 1% gay doesn't make sense, you'd still be straight basically
what does 1% gay even translate to?
The average /fit/izen who saves pictures of half-naked men on his pc is even beyond that.
Wait. wait wait. That is true?
Wtf.
Jace Barnes
Why bother?
If you're arguing with someone who actually BELIEVES this tripe, and doesn't recognize the dysgenic effect such would have in an evolutionary context, then the real question isn't "how do I argue against this?", its "why the fuck are you wasting your time arguing with a scientifically-illiterate indoctrinated ideologue?", especially if you're trying to do so via dialectic instead of via rhetoric, especially-especially if you're trying to argue as to the truth of self-reported surveys as pertains to teenage sexuality instead of studies which are far more objective.
Shift the argument from one that is stupid, to one that is sane - namely, to the dysgenic effect this would have, if it were true. Go here and listen to the first segment about aberrant sexuality: > radio.therightstuff.biz/2016/06/18/darwin-digest-episode-16-high-risk-behaviours/ Should give you all the ammunition you need.
I am glad that I am a firstborn. I guess I can be described as a purely dominant bisexual, but I wouldn't call myself either bi or gay. I never feel adressed when people talk about gay, bi or lgbt politics.
I wonder how the statistics on traditional amish families work.
Btw does feminizing always equal homosexuality? As we now there are extremely pathetic feminine men out there, who are straight (but let their gf peg them).
Christopher Harris
Sexuality has gotten more complicated as people consider and talk more about what their actual fetishes are.
A lot of people would say the person wanting to fuck a trap is super gay while others may say that's not really gay or only semi gay. So there's some openness as people consider whether they're comfortable with some of these things or not.
Main thing in my mind is that there's a lot of people that are bisexual who may previously have just identified as straight or gay. There's also some gay guys that would pretend they're straight and try their best to force themselves to be in a relationship with a woman because it seemed right, leading to them wanting to cheat on the side constantly.
The idea that half of a population isn't straight is ridiculous though since this is a study done on a population that likely doesn't even know for sure what they're interested in sexually as they are largely not sexually active unless they're non-white.
That's good. I think it's a bit weird, when mtf trans people are somehow into women.
I can't shake the feeling that they did that to at least get into lesbian pussy. And then of course kill themselves, once they find out that lesbians are into real pussy and not into feminine penises.
Oliver Powell
When a nigga sucks a nigga off and laughs it off with his niggas later.
Brayden Lee
You are a gay and must die.
Mason Martin
me too tbh. i get the feeling they're men-hating feminists who did it to rid themselves of being one of those nasty males.
i like guys! i'm a bit into girls too. like, they're really hot and i can imagine hanging out and being friend and doing some sexual stuff with them. but that's like playing around with a bff. i really want a man to make me feel feminine and submissive and to look after me and be able to fuck me properly, not like a girl.
Blake Morgan
I honestly don't feel adressed, when you call me that.
And I don't feel promiscuous at all either. In fact I am not into guys just purely out of lust, like some people are. I would be happy in a relationship with a non-whoring around guy, I think.
then I am not even 1% gay, because I don't want to suck a penis or have it inserted into my anal tract
