>A closeted boy runs the risk of being outed by his own heart after it pops out of his chest to chase down the boy of...

How much do you want to bet the people that made this were either chicks or weren't faggots? They don't even know how faggots actually behave IRL.

Finally a gay cartoon that actually looks decent and not pastel Tumblr crap.

Yeah, instead of looking like Tumblr shit, it looks like generic dreamworks shit.

the thing already looks like tumblr crap by the way the proportions and the anatomy

That is even more gay than the short itself.

You know, a lot of people say that fags should try to make their own content instead of asking other people who don't like faggot content to make it for them. So this is okay i guess.

...

She doesn't have to be Ms Right for you to fuck her

The cure for cancer is a good dicking.

For the purposes of procreation, right?

a fair point, and to that end I can respect it
what we don't have to do is like it, and the second the rainbow-hair clique starts demanding that we like it is when the backlash starts

...

Honestly I'm not seeing whats so bad about this, its not like its something being shoved down your / our throats or anything.

I mean your free to hate it or dislike it all you want , but some of the reactions seem a bit over the top to this video.

...

Personally I just think it's cringy as shit and I'd feel the same way if one of them was a girl. I also want to fucking kill that little heart.

What is this fuckness

Die.

What for?

...

This guy sounds like Mr Garrison. Are we sure he's not a repressed homosexual himself?

Go away Holla Forums, people have been having sex for fun since ancient times.

Can someone explain this meme to me, please?

Here's the source

...

Yuri is just as degenerate if not more so (two pure girls turn to the most base of carnalities), you utter hypocrite.

They don't even look like teenagers, this is grade school shit and I do not like it. They could have just as easily made it about college age punks but it has to be about little kids thisting fo dick.

I WONDER
WHY
THIS
IS

Doesn't make it right you dumbass.

Not if everyone else around them is the wrong mold, and you cannot compete with 20+ years of programming.

Yuri is pure. Lesbians are sinful. The problem is 3D. Once you go 3D, you go retarded.

No it isn't you degenerate slop of flesh. If it were pure, then it could produce babies. If it were pure, why is there a male gender?
The fact that you can sit through that trash and enjoy it without a hint of sickness tells me a lot about who you are. Get help.

because propaganda is totally a valid form of content that everyone should accept without question

Are you one of those that see politically motivated murder as a legit left leaning "content"? Do bug fetishism is a gay type of content?

Except the programming isn't always hard. Like I said, if they've not dyed their hair yet, and lack any obvious tattoos, then they're still within a reasonable limit of JUST.

Both "kids" are around high school / early college age so it's fine that they're faggots, stop whining.
I liked the premise but it came out too short and too boring, should have had more scenes dealing with the heart pushing the ginger forward. Besides it's implied that the heart left the chest in a moment of fear, not love. Overall bad execution but what more do you expect from a college project?

Can a faggot create a story about faggots who like to do faggot things? Sure
Unless this short was done around the time Rocky Horror Picture Show came out, it is fucking propaganda. Faggots haven't been special in decades and this is nothing more than propaganda about non existent hate against da gays.

To Add on

You know what WOULD be impactful and "current year"? Have da gay in a middle eastern shit hole with both parties trying to not get stoned. It would actually make more fucking sense then the propaganda we got now

Yuri is the purest form of love, you nigger.

...

Shameful

Is no one going to talk about the animation of the heart? Looks like a legit hybrid of CG and hand drawn.

fag

Keep believing that you degenerate faggot.

gay shit is not cute

The character design is shitty Disney inspired shit. At most you could say it's vaguely tim burton inspired.

It screams low effort ripoff. The story is the thing that carries it and that will completely alienate anyone who doesn't already agree with the gays.

Here is a (you), user.

IN YOUR OPINION

>>>/bog/

im not making any statement on the value or agenda of the cartoon in question here, but doesn't that sound like rampant hypocrisy to you?
its the same as when weeaboos whose walls are lined with posters of lewd anime girls and figurines complain about furries, as if liking cuckime trash and hentai was any more or less degenerate than liking furry Holla Forums cartoons.

I agree with what you say, but is there a better name than can be used than fucking "cuckime"? It doesn't even roll of the tongue, even something like "Gayime" or "Degenime" would be better.

cuckime rolls of the tongue perfectly, what are you on about?

That's not how homos work, they'll rip their rectums while sodomizing their poop chutes and then have 1000 partners before dying at the ripened age of 44 with super aids.
But no it's completely natural guize!

Just that it sounds like someone is putting two words together that doesn't right, I don't know where the term started but he and or you aren't the only one who uses it, as I've seen other anons use it.

The difference is that we do for our own enjoyment and don`t expect anyone to accept it, rather than using children as a means to push this innocuous portrait of faggotry rather than the reality of disease and excess. Did you saw all those fucking prizes they smugly put on the thumbnail? They want to make a statement with this, that is clear.

Of course you understand the nuances, you just feigning ignorance you commie faggot.

As a dude who likes dudes, there's a big fucking difference between apoliticized art (anime tiddies) and by the numbers state condoned mass "moral" art. This shit is hollow.

next you're going to tell me you watch lesbian degenerate cuckime "ironically" right?
>>>Holla Forums

its clear that there's an agenda pushing to make the video seen, with cash most likely. theres thousands of cuckime yaoi/yuri videos on youtube but they don't get 15 million fucking views.

The difference is the purpose of (most) cartoon lesbians is to garner attention via sexually arousing the audience. This animation's purpose is to try to present an abnormal mental condition as something to be celebrated and thus normalize it.

And yes, lewd depictions of humans is less degenerate than lewd depictions of humanoid non-humans. But the anime fans' issue with furries isn't just about the level of degeneracy, but also about personal taste. The weeaboos and the furries are two different camps who happen to have the largest populations on the internet, which results in an unspoken rivalry as the two fight for dominance.

Not really.
Faggotry and lesbianism is degenerate trash that should be shot down every time it is brought up, but the difference here is that this animation is used to shove a political agenda. It's why everyone hated Korra's lesbianism (at least when it was confirmed), besides just hating her and her shitty show.

Those arent children, they are just fictitious characters, user.

wtf is this artsy fartsy shit?

right. because the lesbian 8 year olds in your cuckime are totally OK. What about kodomo no jikan? that one is a big wombo combo of degeneracy but i dont see you f/a/ggots complain about it, in fact i've seen praise for it.

oh but wait, its totally OK because there is no PoliticalAgenda© behind it right?

fuck you. if you're going to complain about pushing of degenerate behavior then complain about the whole package, not just about what -you- specifically don't like.

And besides that, it is just the cartoon in question here, literally the only one, no other cartoon has two faggots openly falling in love as main characters.
Yeah, Japan has the yuri and yaoi and whatever without any agenda or political pretentions. For whatever reason they don't have a problems with gay characters in animation. But americans do have problems with gay character in animation, this was the first attempt and there is people talking like they are trying kill half of the human race with this animated short. There wouldn't be a political agenda in favor of gays in cartoons if people would be okay with that like in Japan, but there is a political agenda against gays in cartoons and this is the first attempt, the political part was unavoidable in this case.
It is even worse if you think about it, the short doesn't have any dialogue, it doesn't even have a kiss, it is not produced by a big studio, it was made using crowdfunding, it is the only short made so there is not a series yet.
There was no way they could make a short with two faggots falling in love without being called sjws or jews or something like that here in Holla Forums, except for maybe making it with a lot of gross comedy or something like that.

Way to completely miss what the user said.

then why do so many americans watch cartoons where the characters are openly gay with each other?

the fact that said cartoons come from Japan does not make it okay

If she bleeds, she can breed, user.

public opinion seems to disagree with you.

There is no noticeable/sizeable agenda against gays in America. The backlash is against the recent overwhelming attempts to make it celebrated and considered "normal" socially/politically that borders on or outright is pure propaganda - especially when it uses children to make it seem 'innocent', or presumes to take the moral high ground by depicting anyone who disagrees with or opposes that lifestyle as cruel, violent, brainless bigots.

Depends on the country.

They are not really that open, if you compare it as how straight romances are treated. They are always lesbians because that is safer, there are not kisses, not really love declarations, or relationships, it is always something ambiguous, or lightly implied, or telling and not showing.

The animated short hardly has that, only some seconds of some guys staring weirdly at them, the homophobic analogy wasn't really active in the narrative, and i wouldn't call it overwhelming attempts when this particular short is the first and only one made with open gay characters and not rated PG 13 or R. Even studios don't want to state directly they make gay characters and even less as main character. They are jewing their money trying to play safe, i know, but that is an agenda.

what country?

other than islamic ones, that barely even count as "countries", i don't know any country where parents and police would gleefully let you chat up a 12 year old with the clear purpose of sex.

Remember that you can't have it both ways, rejecting 'jewish' psychology and using it as a tool.

It is also a subconscious realization that it's not homosexuality that is being celebrated, but homosexuality for white men.

...

If that were the case, you wouldn't be arguing to not call it sodomy.

You are the reason people will never again let traditionalists gain power.

Have you always been this retarded?

How fucking new are you?

I was trying to show you how "people have been doing _ since ancient times" is a terrible argument.

Not Holla Forums here but they got one thing right, homo sex is even more about selfish pleasure than straight up whoring.

The 'jewish' psychology thing has always been a meme, you retard. It's only the muslims who thought they've got a home on Holla Forums who think psychology is literally Jewish while what the oldfags on Holla Forums meant was that psychology as a legitimate field of study have been corrupted. And yes, faggotry is a mental disease, just because you don't want to admit it doesn't make it go away.
t. literal homo

Pleb

...

Question

Pure vanilla bully girls who hate degeneracy are da bes

It's so easy to bait you fuckers

True, but they enjoy being baited, so it's really only giving them what they want.

Pretty unrealistic tbh

...

...

Are we seriously having a thread about two fags loving each other? Is there is a reason to care at this point what gay people do? At least is its own independent fucking film which is good. This doesn't make any sense, first we complain about how SJW always fucking up established settings in the name of [Progressive movement], now we're complaining about something that they made on their own. What are we tumblr now?

I'm willing to bet I've been here on Holla Forums longer than any of you fags.

Actually, it's a perfectly legitimate argument when faced with anons sperging out over stuff that no one in history gave two fucks about aside from that time the Victorians decided to go full retard.

Nice try.

You're not from around here if you can't even understand the basic principles of "making fun of shitty things that are bad".
The way you talk makes it clear you're triggered that we are complaining about specifically the propaganda aspects of this despite that being just one of many reasons why this is shit.

Quite literally none of what you have just stated is an argument, you're just shitting verbally.
I wish you Jewish Holla Forums fags would get the fuck off of our boards.

Baby don't hurt me,
don't hurt me no more.

I'm sure they'll appreciate the unintentional compliment.

See how the Jew jumps around having to make an argument!

...

Elaborate?

Really, though. Pointing out more degeneracy things with your own special kind of degeneracy aside them doesn't make it appear any less wrong.

Wrong image.

..Now that's a joke.

Not really, the quality of this short film is hardly in the conversation here.

What if the other kid wasn't a fag? I mean I know for the purpose of this propaganda it's just accepted that these two twinks should be together, but what kind of message does that send? The Red Head, as far as we all know, had no way of knowing the other guy was gay. Is the message that you should go after that sweet boipucci blindly because it's [[[current year]]] and you're a bigot if you don't requite the lust of some fag?

Pic related, alternate ending to this short

>>Holla Forums and stay their.

There's a better chance he's from Holla Forums but I'll report the both of you for bringing up Holla Forums and derailing.

Nice job being purposefully obtuse. Do you have something to confess, user? Have you told your parents yet?

...

Because people are judgemental on things they deem wrong. Homosexuality, especially nowadays with the existence of pride parades and shit like NAMBLA, is seen as wrong by many. The same can be said about smokers, drinkers, druggies, thrill seekers, perverts, etc. There's always reasons to hate something and see it as wrong. Thus people will make their disgust known.

You came to a site delisted by google and condemned by most of the mainstream internet. What did you exactly expect to find here?

The art style alone is shit
Even it weren't fag propaganda it's still an overly cartoonish nightmare
Httyd had a nice cartoonish style but shit like this is just too much
Their heads are bigger than their torsos

The short is just another case of nonsensical, wishful thinking of a perfect faggy world, akin to the "This is me! / You're beautiful" world.

The more realistic scenario is that the other guy will tell the redhead to go take a hike and that will be it. Pretty sure I've seen that in a movie once.

This a concept I still struggle to understand. In a first scenario you have a SJW pushing for "progressiveness" and trying to redefine [thing]. Now in a second scenario you have a independent artist who makes "Tumblr art" that gets widespread and famous without the intention for pushing progressive. They just simply wanted to make what they love.

Which is pretty inaccurate to say that this film has "propaganda aspects". I don't get how a large amount of people liking something is propaganda. Its not like the film told anyone to accept these fags, it simply just told a story about a gay kid. Which kinda begs the question. How change you differentiate between propaganda and SJW art? Is any form of SJW art propaganda? Does the art become propaganda when the people try to normalize the it? Is it wrong for people to make SJW art at all?

Because faggots spread more aids and molest more kids than literally any other group. And any wrongdoing is glossed over with "well I was born that way you bigot"
Not even mudslime, but they need to be policed more often if you ask me

The short is propaganda simply because it's incredibly dishonest portrayal of faggots and their courting rituals. Real faggots aren't all cute twinky boys and they sure as hell don't cutely follow each other around. They go to fag bars, get some lube from the dispenser, and go to the bathroom and rip open each others poop chutes. Some don't even bother going to the bathroom. Fags are nasty, even without stds.
The short is basically "see they're just like normal people look how cute this is" but they really fucking aren't. What tumblr thinks faggots are does not match reality

You sound like you have plenty of experience regarding what gay people do. It's almost as if you're a giant faggot.

Are you experiencing frustration?
No amount of deflection or projection will fix your prolapsed asshole.

It's a way to enable whore behaviour as acceptable. Which isn't very good for a society's sexual environment.

If fags want to die from aids and make bad cartoons that's their choice, but you can't force people to like it user. Don't get butthurt.
Unless you actually are gay, in which case butthurt is unavoidable

Now, I never denied what he said as true or false. However, if he has such intimate knowledge of what fags do, he must be a bug-catching cocksucker himself. This is just basic logic.

Eh, I really don't know about that. Lets say you switch the genders of one of the characters in this film. Is it anymore real now? I'm not sure on how gay kids at in school. The only two thing I've ever witness was two gay kids who dated back in my highschool once. And they use to cuddle each other in the court yard during lunch while my table made fun of them. The other time was some gay black guy I had in my cooking class. The black guy was pretty normal, but the other two fags where pretty feminine in their behavior. So I wouldn't accurately state that gay people only act like "this" so boldly.

>>>Holla Forums

are you watching the same clip we are? Those are the facial features and body size of grade schoolers. Just because they dress sort of nicely doesn't mean they're older.

This reminds me a of when they announced the next Doctor would be a woman. Nobody gave a fuck because Doc Who is niche shit, yet the Twitter fags were out in force defending it against an enemy that wasn't there and hoping said enemy would be pissed about it.

Then we have where idiots gave $41,988 to some cartoonist just so they could "stick it" to SJWs, even though it looks like 90's Image shit. But I'm sure we'll be getting a Mary Sue article complaining about it. Probably.

Now we have a thread bitching about a mediocre CGI cartoon with fags in it that I've barely heard of, yet here we are, raging about it when the rest of the world didn't give it any real notice. Outside of SJWs of course, which were crooning that some "hetro" person is going to be angry about it.

How does it feel knowing that you and SJWs are now a minority audience for each other? You both live to piss each other off, like a married couple that enjoys pushing each other's buttons.

At least we embrace the fact that we're a niche group. And we don't do it to compensate on a failure in career choices in a passive aggressive manner.

You may see yourself out

Except it's not. It's entry level scifi that millions of people love. Doctor Who is huge.

You mean people donated 41K for a comic they wanted to see happen, that is meant to be a classic marvel comic without the retarded politics.

What the fuck are you talking about?

Statistically speaking what's the likelihood that the one person that gay ginger has a crush on also happens to be gay to reciprocate? The odds can't be good.

Slim to none.

Weren't they 10 though? And only the oppai loli menstruated.

JFC, I want to kill the fucks who shit out this tripe

...

That's just ridiculous, user.

Shit, wrong GIF
Polite sage for tangential post

Must be why Holla Forums loves korrasami so much.

...

Not all fags.
Granted they're a minority of a minority; "normal people" fags do exist. They don't bug chase, have sketchy sex, molest children, act feminine nor flamboyant…etc. Just guys who like other guys, that's it.
t. faggot

Well I mean he isn't wrong. On the extreme end they show suspiciously similar behavior. Only difference is the power balance leans on the left rather than the right.

Not all muslims. Trust me, there are muslims who don't rape, kill, steal, destroy and teach their children to hate the west.
t. next ISIS recruit, I-I mean peaceful muslim

As I said, minority of a minority. But they exist.

that's horse shit and equivalent to comparing meritocracy to equality and saying that since they are so equally adamant they are the same

If the pendulum swings and we end up with another satanic panic, then we fight that too. At present, I see no reason to be overly concerned with the actions or ideology of right-wingers when the left controls…. the mainstream media, most major colleges and universities, hollywood, public schools, most of the largest cities in the country, the movie and TV industry, chunks of vidya, silicon valley, and more.

...

agreed, but I wonder if you meant to quote me or the guy I was quoting

No such thing.

This short is mediocre. Lets post better animated shorts.

Depressing one.

Does this count? Whatever it's a classic.

There are, you don't see them in pride parades, gay bars or among the general flamboyant gay population. Because they don't openly talk about their sexuality unless absolutely necessary, you'll find some on Holla Forums too.

There must be a way to measure this.
What's the absolutely worst form of love and then let's see what it's opposite is?

furry is a good start

you know, SJWs on tumblr hate it when people reinterpret gay shit to make it not gay, as evident by the way they reacted to people saying that korrasami were just friends when holding hands. we could troll these people so hard if we start un-ironically and un-sarcastically saying that these two boys/ruby and sapphire/ the loud house gay dads etc are just two people forming a friendship centred around the fact that they are both schizophrenic and are hallucinating floating hearts/are fused together for strictly combat purposes/ might be looking after Clyde as step dad and actual dad because the mom died and her ex and current husband decided to raise the child together but are not married to each other. this could happen every time faggots are presented in fiction.

Beastiality beats furry. There is anons here you actually post people raping deer, dogs, and horses. Seriously, what the fuck?

I'd say adult/child and CP is way worse, since children come out of it with severe mental scars or worse, physical ones that cannot be healed. Animals can at least come out of the experience and continue their lives normally and breed and so on or better yet kill the abuser

Horses could kill their abusers easily. Dogs are doubtful unless they're being abused in other ways. Deer could at least scrap you up a bit. Maybe gore you if they're male. But yeah, pedos are worse than bestiality perverts. They're still horrible but they, in cases were they're otherwise sane, can be treated to stop their habits. Pedophiles not so much. They can be treated or find outlets in other things but I doubt a real pedo could be cured of their inner perversion for good.

Irrelevant
A fag is a fag is a fag
A degenerate freak doesn't suddenly become tolerable because it avoids pride parades

Jesus christ
Are there bestiality weirdos lurking forests "hunting" deer like this? Is this an actual thing that happened?

"Normal" faggots are ontologically non-existent. There is no such thing as a normal homosexual.

Clearly, you've never heard of PETA

Rin and Aoki's love is pure!

Never underestimate rednecks and other sick fucks out there.

...

I'm talking about behavior with others, what makes a normal person to you? Someone who keeps his fetishes and sexual habits to his bedroom, and outside it he's just another productive member of society, right?
That's a normal fag for you right there.

Their children's ability to live like them and survive long enough to reproduce.

So no women above the age of 40 and no one born sterile, and no men or women who choose not to have kids. This is a problem I find with a lot of anti-gay arguments. Almost everything "wrong" that you can point out could also be wrong with straight people. Sexual deviation? You could use the same excuse to ban all sex except reproductive sex in missionary position. Moral deviation? Morals are entirely based on culture, and certainly no law should be based on them just as religion has no place of power in politics, they can certainly help inform lawmakers and citizens and help them see things from a different point of view but logic should be the main driving point behind laws. In the end the only real reason to dislike it is personal taste, and even then "I don't like it so stop" isn't a valid argument, the world isn't your hugbox.

Inevitably what it really boils down to is the basic human right to strive for happiness. If one man wants to fuck another there really is no problem with it, they can do what they want. Same as how 200 years ago a woman showing too much skin was scandalous.

If you really wanna talk social politics and culture about it, I'm totally game.

*Morals change from period to period. Same as how 200 years ago a woman showing too much skin was scandalous.

I was going to write a reply akin to the one you wrote but you really hit the nail on the head, props.

I said Furry is a start you tool

That's just asinine

Could have had children, nature has taken away their means of reproduction. Gays never had it in the first place
Are aberrations, much like mules.
Could still have children, gays cannot even if they wanted to.
How do you justify homosexuality when a civilization of only homosexuals could not last past one generation naturally? Pleasure for the sake of pleasure is not right. It's hedonism and it's the death of strong civilizations. No amount of "But they just want to be HAPPY! :(" will change that fact.
If the issue in question here was not homosexuality, but Pedophilia, or incest, or beastiality, or necrophilia, would you still be using the same arguements?

Missed the point. The point was they didn't. I assumed your argument here was "Gays are bad because they choose not to have kids with women", so please correct me if I'm wrong, but women who choose not to have kids are in the same boat.

So are gays.

Neither gays or women unable to carry children are like Mules at all really. A mule is the result of a horse and a donkey breeding. Horses and Donkeys are different species but close enough to produce offspring however that offspring is sterile because their differing chromosomes. People who are born sterile don't ALWAYS have chromosomal issues, usually when humans have misplaced chromosomes they end up coming out mentally retarded, and about half mentally challenged people are sterile.

Women with defects caused at birth or later in life due to injury who can't bear or have extreme challenged becoming pregnant are in the same boat as gay people who can't have children. There is no point having sex with them because reproduction is impossible or greatly challenging.

And a gay man "Could" have a child if he chose to impregnate a woman. I don't get your point here. Gay men have surrogate children all the time as well as adopt kids. Which I think is an important part of our culture at this point because so many people just give up kids and it's fairly depressing.

Now you're using the slippery slope argument, which is literally the exact same argument they used to those "Lewd ankles 100 years ago!" and not only that but also race mixing, not only with black people but also people of different nations like irish people. There is also the issue of consent. With the issue of Pedophilia, bestiality, and necrophilia, one party cannot give consent. What I gather here is that you think it's totally fine to fuck kids, dead people, and animals if only you could produce offspring with them. I'll also counter this with a similar question. Do you think it's okay for older people to have sex with underage children if they're sexually capable of bearing children?

This is where you lost me. If you REALLY wanted to trigger some people you should've latched onto the insanity that is trannyism, tumblrism, and their retarded pronounds, or pride parades. I think you need to spend some time on tumblr or reddit shitposting over there more. You're arguments and ability to piss people off is at least a decade old.

Right, it balance of power, and not what that power is used for that's important.

Just because the slippery slope is a fallacy doesn't mean it hasn't happened, you say it yourself, "Lewd ankles 100 years ago" proves it, we've degenerated so far that pretty much nothing is off limits at this point, you don't think It will go even farther? To a certain extent it already has, as soon as the Supreme Court said gay marraige was legal everywhere the debate shifted to trannies, where is it gunna go after that?

I don't think fags are worth arguing over, you obviously are a supporter or are one yourself, I'm not gunna change your mind, but this whole notion that the slippery slope isn't real is retarded, history proves time and time again that it's pretty much always the case.

The problem is that it's cognitive dissonance. There is no correlation between Pedophillia, necrophillia, or faggots. In order for the slippery slope to be valid the actual movements would need to be connected in some way besides "I hate them". With this it's conflating two subjects that aren't connected as being connected. Now if you wanted to use the slippery slope argument and use Trannies instead of pedos, you would have an argument. The T has been attached to the LGB since almost the beginning which is a huge fucking crime because now faggots are lumped in with the insane degenerates that are trannies and adopting their culture because they're constantly lumped in together.

The problem with this argument is that it has no real logic behind it and relies totally on human association which isn't predictable.

Now the tranny issue is a complex one. While they deserve the right to cut off their junk and act like total attention whores, they are worse in that they're actively trying to force it on others with bathroom shit and pronoun shit. There is also the problem with how they are genuinely mentally ill and show severe deviant mental states so they are actually harmful to themselves. I would personally seperate your run of the mill fag or dyke from the tranny crowd because the only thing they have in common is the fact that they were a part of the Gay movement, despite it being undeserved.

Tyranny always ends up in pretty much the same place regardless of which justifications or ideology that led to it.

Okay, a bit of talking past one another. I think we can agree that a high degree of centralization of power leads to shit. My point is that, for example, the political forces against such centralization shouldn't be compared to every other political movement just because they all are political movements.

But that's exactly the case user, gays weren't likened to Pedophiles in the early days for no reason, this goes as far back as ancient Greece

and name one tranny that wasn't at least in the closet before they transitioned, you can't seriously be telling me trannies are fucked in the head but fags are perfectly normal mentally, biologically, etc, they're just as fucked, transgenderism is the logical next step in "fixing" being sexual attracted to the wrong sex for procreation.

They were though. Again, they equated homosexuality, pedophillia, and bestiality to racemixing as well. It's just a list of things that someone personally finds morally reprehensible according to their own personal moral compass.

Most MTF trannies still like women and most FTM trannies still like men.

Okay.
They're all examples of sexual deviancy: Trannies, homos, necros, pedos, etc all deviate from the standard sexuality.That's a pretty objective fact, right?
If you start accepting one degree of sexual degeneracy, it becomes easier to accept a greater degree of sexual deviancy. If you don't want the slide to continue indefinitely, you have to put your foot down a some point. Preferably before it's too late.

All cases of sexual deviancy.
Clearly, the skirts should have stayed at ankle-length.
…
Well, yeah, I guess nothing is objectively good or bad. Nihilism is the final truth of the universe.
But that's no way to live a life. And it's certainly no attitude to build a decent society on.

But you have no proof they are somehow conected.
A society were personal rights are well established and respected sounds like a decent society. And sexual rights are included in that.

Different user here. To have a society where sexual rights are included, you still have to draw a line at a certain point to avoid chaotic incidences. Anything beyond gay, like trannies or pedos, is too much and has no place within a normal functioning society. There always has to be regulations in place under the law itself to clear up confusion of what the law entails.

i understand, but i am talking specifically about gay people.

Standard sexuality cannot be defined. Again, it boils down to "What I find moral" Really the only standard we should have in this case is "What is logical?" and in this specific case "What is logical for a society that values liberty and freedom?" The basic right of man is that he may seek happiness however he chooses as long as it does not cause adverse harm on others.

Just as an example, again, race mixing, sex for pleasure (according to mormanism and other sections of christian community). In the end saying "gay is wrong" is no different from a jew bitching about non-kosher food. The only difference I see is one subject is food and the other is sex.

Except your very argument disproves that because there has been huge pushback each and every step of the way for all of these. Pedophillia is still illegal last time I checked and still massively shunned upon in every part of society in america except retarded academics who are far from the norm.

It never becomes "easier" to accept, it's just "easier" to accept because in the case of fags wanting to bang and get married, it's entirely two adult's decisions. In the examples of necrophillia and pedophillia and bestiality it involves one adult and one other entity that cannot express a valid form of consent. Dead people and animals can't communicate, children aren't fully developed enough to consent to sexual activity without a risk of adverse harm on their psych.

Also I'm not asking for acceptance, I'm advocating for tolerance. You can hate something all you want, but it doesn't give you the right to take it away from others. Nor does it give others the right to force it on you.

So would you advocate for hijabs as well? Their sole purpose is to prevent the human male from degenerating into a mess of sexual deviancy. The problem with this argument is that it assumes that the correct way is the old way, which isn't necessarily true. The correct way usually lies somewhere between the two extremes, in this case the extremes being puritanism and hedonism.

That's one way of looking at it, it's the inevitable end to most viewpoints that consider the outside more than the inside. Personally I like to think finding happiness in life, and finding enjoyment in the decisions you make and the way you live is the way to do it. I find most people seek happiness without finding happiness with themselves first. They fixate on finding a dream job or working on relationships all the while forgetting that those are all much more easily obtained through a good foundation of decision making, planning, and personal care. Worrying about inevitability is pointless. In a million years you'll be dead so worrying about the "ultimate end" is pointless. Life isn't about where you end up, it's enjoying how you got there.

Ah. If it's just homosexuality then yeah it's fine. Still needs some amount of regulating to keep it from going full flaming fruit. Like for starters, avoid allowing pride parades. They do nothing but promote the worst aspects of gay "culture".

You forget the argument "Love is Love" and etc. for same-sex "marriage".
Once you redefine marriage, aka remove the actual definition of marriage, you then have no basis to discriminate against any other new definition.
If two men/women can be "married", why not two brothers or two sisters?
Says who? Who defines "wrong" here? We are operating under the same [lack of] definition as with same-sex unions, namely
1. Consent
2. "Love"
If that's all it takes then there cannot be an argument regarding two brothers being "married" because they both consent and are "in love".
Children, which was once part of the very definition of marriage in principal, are no longer an issue since it was removed for same-sex "marriage". Also adoption; if it is permissible for same-sex partners to adopt then the same for same-sex sibling couples.
And if so, then what about FatherxDaughter or MotherxSon? Wait, are you worried about incest offspring? Well not only do we still have the above to consider, then we also consider
1. "My body, my choice"
2. "It's not hurting anyone"
If a child is born of incest then it was purely out of consent and love and, in fact, it was the choice of the woman to give birth - not yours. Get your hands out of her uterus!

It's her child, firstly. You have no say.
Secondly, are you implying that children born with birth disabilities are inherently harmed by being born with them? What about children born from women past their prime (35+) and thus have a higher risk of Autism and other disabilities? What about women who just naturally had a genetic trait in their family - and knew about it - which led to this outcome? Are these women also at fault? What's good for the goose is good for the gander, so to speak. You have to be equal in applying it all around. If you want to stop a woman from having a child by incest then you better stop a 40+yr old from having a child, too.

Besides, it's not like children by adoption are blood related anyway. If they get married (as consenting adults) then they wouldn't even have that issue. It's cool, right? Because it's not blood relations it doesn't count as a problem. Adoption is like that - it only counts when you want it to, otherwise it doesn't actually count.

Therefore you have just immediately opened the door to Incest "Marriage", incestuous sexual reproduction and potentially destroyed the institution of adoption simply by allowing same-sex "marriage" to be a thing. Why? Because your definitional terms were amorphous and vague and allowed for all this according to them.
Good job, progressives.

Your first sentence is unbearably retarded. Fuck reading your whole post. If the sexual behaviors do not enable or facilitate breeding behaviors it is deviancy. It is by that very virtue that human sexual behaviors are non-comparable to animal.

tld;dr yur a feg

What makes a normal person to me is NOT someone who fucks poop chutes in public buildings, dances naked in a parade while pissing in another man's mouth, forces christcucks to bake cakes for them, creates nambla, enables trannies, or gleefully passes aids to fellow "pozpigs", or try to argue that going against basic human biology is normal, and egotistically think all who oppose them are secretly in the closet because no one could ever REALLY hate fags
I suppose you'll think my standards are too high but you're a faggot so who gives a shit

The problem with incest is that it corrupts the gene pool. It's not so much that it's "Morally problematic" it's that it causes genetic problems, so there is a logical reason to have incestuous breeding banned there. Relationships are an entirely different issue, and given the "Liberty and freedom" argument it's hard to make a case against it. However there is also psychological and biological reasons for people to not want to breed with their siblings, parents, or children.

It can occur, but the chances of any two family members wanting to bone each other is even slimmer than someone being gay. You could make the case that incest fetishism is on the rise, given how common it or dynamics like it are portrayed in porn, but that's merely fetishism, and doesn't translate into physical relationships. People are more attracted to the "idea" of it rather than actually executing it. It's similar to idle thoughts of murdering or doing bad things to people. Sometimes people just thinks about it.

Now you're getting into the "marriage debate" which I don't much care for. Marriage has been essentially meaningless since divorce became incredibly easy and simple. Personally I think we need to set a time limit, 5-10 years of marriage is required before a divorce unless it's on other grounds, such as spousal abuse or something similar, and then another 5-10 years where marriage is not optional. But as for that argument Marriage was created mainly as a form to help two people care for each other. It ties up their assets and has basically nothing to do with children. It used to be stigma that only married couples could have children, and I think this needs to become stigma again.

Then there is a significant problem there as they're literally and intentionally polluting the gene-pool. And as for the "Get out of my uterus!" argument, a fetus isn't a part of their uterus, it's a baby. The punishment should probably be left to men who are in charge of it. Personally I'd forcibly take the child away put them in protective services and then give the parent's jail time, but that's just my opinion. Only the most backwater or insane social progressive would think that their desire for children would trump genetics. Intentionally increasing the risk for birth defects and mental problems is just idiotic and they're putting their own desires before their hypothetical child.

Love doesn't have a place in lawmaking either. It is another subjective concept that is mainly dictated by emotion not logic.

Child services begs to differ.

And that's an argument for someone who knows more about women's degrading reproductive organs. We're also getting off topic. We're not arguing for and against incest, we're arguing for and against homosexuality, and you're bringing up feelings arguments to connect them.

Personal liberty isn't a progressive ideal. The progressive ideal is "Everyone is Equal, period." essentially marxism.

They look ripped straight out of a kleenex commercial.

They are connected in all being sexual deviancies.
Sexual behaviours must be discriminated between, because they are a basic foundation of society, and some are damaging to society.

Non-kosher food doesn't spread diseases and LGBT culture, such as transsexuality, which leads to chopped-up genitals and suicide.
Transgender youth.
"he then prescribes the cross-sex hormone – testosterone for transmales and oestrogen for transfemales. This usually begins at around the age of 12."
independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/what-the-critics-say-about-treatment-for-transgender-children-a7377851.html
When 12-year olds are considered developed enough to make decisions about fucking their bodies up like this, why wouldn't they be developed enough to decide who to have sex with?

That's never been my argument, don't pretend otherwise.

No.
It's not male sexuality that's the problem here, it's female promiscuity. When the culture allows women to act like whores, we're going to get whores, and we're going to run short on house-wives.
Let's err on the side of puritanism, it looks less degenerate from what I'm seeing.

The inside is no different from the outside. It's a continuous whole.
Yeah, let's fiddle while Rome burns, and to hell with future generations.

The only good fag is a dead one
The art style sucks
Also

Just from skimming your post, you look like you have the obvious and rational counter-arguments.
They don't matter. You're missing the point (I think (not that user)). It a sell, and it'll only take enough dumbasses buying in order for the twisted logic to get traction, and all rational counter-arguments will be shut down as "bigotry".

Being gay doesn't spread diseases, lack of condom and disease-awareness in gay communities cause that. The same way lack of awareness and preventative measures spread it in straight communities. LGBT culture is also an entirely separate problem that isn't inherit in anything related to being gay. It's an organization that claims to represent them.

The entire concept is a fucking tragedy. Anyone under the age of 25 doesn't know who they are yet. But this is beside the point. The T has very little to nothing to do with the LGB. If you equate them you're basically giving into John Money's retarded research.

And I'm waiting for you to explain your argument. Don't dodge the point.

Okay.

No. The hijab is literally an article of clothing to prevent sexuality by removing all feminine body parts from the male gaze. It does nothing to prevent female promiscuity. Stoning and lashing is what takes care of that.

Now you're arguing for policing sexuality. Makes you no better than a muslim advocating for Sharia law.

And again, this is a personal opinion. While you're welcome to live your life this way, you can't force others to live your way of life, no matter how much you disagree.

These two things are closely related. Not all fags are like that, sure, but as a whole there's a clear tendency. Enough, too many, fags are like that.
Are most homos staunchly opposed to transsexualism? Or do they consider trannies to be allies against heteronormative patriarchy or some other such?

I've made it a couple times now: sexuality must be regulated.

I wasn't talking about the hijab. Fuck the hijab. Fuck the skirt. Forget about that shit, the ankle-length rule was simply part of the puritan culture, that's what's important here, and women who acted contrary that culture were excluded, sanctioned socially.

No, sharia is a shit system, but that doesn't mean that a system is a bad thing to have.

It's not an opinion if there's an argument to back it up: The more sexual partners a woman has before marriage, the more likely it is to end in a single mother house-hold, which again are the greatest statistical predictor of criminal behaviour, drug abuse, mental and psychological disorders, homelessness, etc.
Apply this logic to transgender youth.

No more closely related than teenagers and unwanted pregnancy.

It's a cultural tendency because Western gay culture is basically San Fancisco's hedonistic-leaning culture wrapped up in a big, fat, pink bow. It's easy to understand how they got here. For years during the 90s and early 2000s the only role models for teens to identify with were liberal ones like Will and Grace or other outspoken party going individuals. You can see this as well in black communities, they idealize gang culture and violence and that mixed with the fact that the lower class, essentially equivalent to white trash, feel powerless, becoming that culture is essentially them trying to feel powerful in a hopeless situation. But that's getting off topic onto black issues and how the US government essentially ruined any hope for Black Americans by pushing them into the welfare system.

And we have a system based on personal choice and liberty. You're telling me that your ideology is totally different from islam's yet you haven't demonstrated to me how yet. All I have to go on is that you want to repress a woman's sexuality to avoid sexual deviancy (Literally the entire purpose of Hijabs and Burkas), you don't like gays (Again in common with Sharia), you support policing sexuality.

Literally the same as the hijab and burka. You don't want women to express anything feminine for fear of it being interpreted as sexual so you want women to cover up. Literally the purpose of the hijab and burka. You're exchanging one shit way of life for another.

No, it's an opinion. It's your opinion on how we should solve these issues, by regressing and restricting personal choices and free will because in your opinion it's better than the alternative of everyone making their own choices and exercising their free will. There are other alternatives to this. What you're offering is a fundamentalist one that goes against today's culture and the idea of personal liberty.

The logic doesn't apply. Again, a human's brain isn't fully developed until mid-20s. Even then it's mostly a cultural phenomenon. I believe it's caused mostly out of boredom. I believe most of the movement is a spoiled rich kid fad and the few that are well and truly serious (The ones that seek out surgery) about it are seriously deluded. there is a pretty big difference between a tumblr tranny and a real tranny. The tumblr one encompasses bullshit like genderqueer and "I identify as the planet jupiter" type of bullshit and is mostly harmless at best and just cultural cancer at worst. The other one is Gender dysphoria. Most transgenders who suffer from Dysphoria are batshit. Gender Dysphoria is a real disorder that causes them to end up harming themselves so it needs to be treated like other such diseases, as in with therapy. Instead the tumblr movement feeds into it and ends up encouraging people to seek out surgery that doesn't work in any way and doesn't even make them happy (and in most cases just makes them more depressed) we need to push them to therapy, and to try and normalize themselves.

But again, we're not talking about trannies, we're talking about gays.

Half of surveyed gay men has had sex with more than 250 different partners. Half of those again had had sex with more than 1000. The amount of teenagers trying that hard to accidentally get pregnant can't compare.

And it has lead to a degeneration of society.
I don't think cheating should have harsher legal consequences than a loss in marital rights, for one. Instead of executing fags, just put them back in the privacy of their own homes and out of children's media. Sharia is religion and law, what I'm looking for is a cultural change that doesn't place more power in the hands of the few, though I don't know for sure, I could maybe be convinced otherwise. Though I would definitely support some laws to regulate who has how many children, to at least prevent dysgenics and race-mixing.
I'll admit, I haven't read up on sharia in detail. I just want a healthier and happier society, and traditionally married women are the happiest women.

Implying my "opinions" aren't based on information and reason.
Is that supposed to be an argument? Today's culture is degenerating society.
No. Plenty of liberty to spare. If a woman insists on being a whore, let her. But let society call her what she is. Let other women be discouraged from making her mistake.

I think the ankle-long skirt is very feminine.
The miniskirt is sexually charged.
I'd like a regression in sexual values to what worked, something that most people today would call puritanical.
No argument in sight. And don't keep comparing puritanical culture to sharia, sharia isn't what the western civilization had before the sexual liberation.

I'm not sure what we're talking about, or what I'm saying. I'm tired, and I'm going to bed.
'night,

But we fucking don't because it's leftist cancer.

Dubs confirm.

Hardly. Unless it hurts the animal like a snake. Or do people say it's abuse because you're defiling the animal and the animal is too retarded to care? I keep hearing the "consent" argument, that you're "raping" the animal, but I never really understood it.
Not saying it isn't fucking disgusting though.

You're not entirely wrong, but morals are objective.
You find that throughout high civilizations, homosexuality is considered abhorrent, women should wear modest clothing, women should subject themselves to men who should be head of the house, etc.. Even when a culture degenerates like Rome, there's still the ideals; the Germanics were found to have similar ideals to Rome, for example.
Sex between a man and a woman outside of marriage is a sin, as well as sex within wedlock for any other reason but to have children. The missionary position is so you're not looking at the flesh, but your partner's eyes.

go the chad way
hump and pump em with cum
then dump em

Fuck you faggots and your retarded reverse psychology

Sorry but this is the most retarded thing I've read all day. How is it more logical to transition (taking hormones, multiple surgeries, cutting off your dick which are all painful as hell and you can't procreate) just to become a woman hoping to seduce a man for sex who probably won't fuck 'it' anyway, than just fucking another faggot and being done with it?
Homosexuality is a whole different matter than the transgender issue; one is an alternate sexuality while the other is a case of the brain not being in sync with the body. It has been a topic of debate for years where the problem actually lies (in the brain or the body) but no one was able to fix the brain, only the body through transitioning.

Egyptian user here, political islamism has successfully achieved that in my country and trust me you don't want that.
Become a female first, then spend a week in any arab country of your choosing where the weather is typically 40+ degrees celsius, then tell me how great it is wearing a gigantic garbage bag.

That was exactly my point, normal fags don't do any of that shit. How "normal" is homosexuality is highly debatable, but then again "is it normal" is not an argument as per a lot of practices and medical treatments which are not "normal" but are allowed anyway because they cause no harm to anyone.

Another egyptian user here, the problem is not so much with the high temperatures as much as it's with the humidity.
more like stay a male and lament how beautiful everyone might look if they didn't look like some bizzare spec-ops outfit.

Ayy lmao
The aesthetic is only but one side of hijab/niqab, and that's only from the male point of view. But there's definitely more to it; it's oppressive, victim-blaming, and outright harmful to the woman's psych and body.
It's elaborated more in the hijab thread on >>>/misr/ but I can't be assed to find the exact post right now

Way too many sodomites ITT. I always knew Holla Forums was the faggiest board after /cuteboys/
Look at pic related shitpushers, it's your future.

No, these are normal since if their children live like them they too will be able to reproduce.

Indeed, these aren't normal.

No one called you out on jacking it to cartoon girls, user.

Tell me about /22/ then user. I bet you're just some exodus fag who thinks he's hot shit

Are you seriously trying to argue that there is any westerner alive today who doesn't know how GRIDS is transmitted and what condoms do? Are you just fucking with us now that you've ran out of arguments?

Just watch me:
Straight sex is the norm

...

People who haven't got any genetic deceases.
People who haven't been psychologically/physically traumatize.
And what he said.
But don't take me wrong I consider them still has humans.

Irrelevant, that's part of the normal cycle of human life.
Yes
Irrelevant, that's a choice (a difficult one).
Some of them are some aren't.
Is it moral to reproduce and protect your children ?.
The basis of moral is to make community life between people livable/agreeable.
Some of them are instincts, some of them are imposed by mutual cooperation of the groups.
m8 if logic/science was what made the laws for the past 50 years gay would still be considered has a mental decease.
youtube.com/watch?v=S4O33IbTWQ8
Has for nowadays if you look the "studies" made by trans defender they are openly biased.
No it's because no or little real research was correctly made for a long time because of political reasons.

I agree but this is some straight line that can't change.
If you put the happiness of a little group of people instead of the majority then you have a problem.

Indeed besides being gay it isn't a problem :^)

You should stop taking sugar with your coffee then :p

Again, irrelevant, it's a choice not a biological barrier.

No, they aren't on the same boat.
Gays can't have children because two partners of the same sex can't create offspring's.
Sterile people cant have children either because genetic defects or because unfortunate events.

True but in that case the man would be gay but by or going against his gayness to have something he can't have otherwise.
Because being gay wasn't already a problem.
Agreed, but that's because our time have generated weak people.
Yes

Just because the slippery slope is a fallacy doesn't mean it hasn't happened
Contradiction, but unfortunately happened already.
But it's not a slippery slop in the sense that people are accepting because they know what they are talking about.
It's a action/reaction of political game.
Normies don't even know what they are really supporting in politics, since they don't know jack shit and the small info that gets to them is BS then they don't see the reasons for not supporting it.
And the political game goes on about who shouts the most and who gets the most virtue signal points.

Disgusting queer shit, just like the rest of (((Western))) cartoons and Holla Forumsmics.

Do some then, faggot. Find a permanent cure for the alleged "disease" that is homosexuality and then blame people for not taking it.

There's no such thing as a normal gay, shitdicking is abnormal

There's already a cure faggot, pic related

This thread went straight off the rails and into complete chaos.

...

Yes, thank you for spelling out my point.

If someone is into yuri (not solo) they are going to either be doing it as a voyeur (cucking themselves), or identifying as one of the kawaii little girls. Yuri will therefore have 3 main groups of fans: cucks, dykes and trannies.
Which are you user?

Being this much but-hurt because you discovered that no or little studies are made correctly.
sigh

...

>>>Holla Forums

Look, if you're going to cite demographic info from pre-aids panic san francisco than please go ahead, but you're stating it as if you disproved my point.

Statistics don't mean anything without proper context.

Which is personal opinion.

You're proposing law based on archaic christian understanding of the world. A puritan's perspective. If you concur with that description you're literally the same. Islam is the religion you're looking for as it has all the things you seem to want.

I never said they weren't. I'm just saying you want to regress culture and society back X number of years because of a strange sense of what I assume as nostalgia for "better" times.

Innoffensively feminine would've been better wording on my part. The problem is you're removing personal choice while enforcing your own. It goes against the basic right of man.

It could work now. The problem isn't that we've become a nation of degenerates, we just don't have the proper laws, procedures, or incentives in place. A good example of this is welfare surprisingly. Back in the 1960s and 1970s the government ran a campaign to push more black americans to welfare. This was because they had an unusually high rate of single mothers (Something around 17 or 20 percent. Basically the same number as single mother today.) This caused a snowball effect and now the number is absolutely and unbelievably ridiculous (Something around 60 or 70 percent if I remember right) and this loss in values fucked their community up tremendously.

If we reduce welfare benefits for single mothers and encourage fathers to stay faithful and become valued figureheads in their family I have no doubt that the divorce rate will pitfall. The question isn't "Why do we need to regress ourselves?" The question is "How do we fix or change the system to more do what it's supposed to do and genuinely help people who need it while simultaneously discouraging abuse". I digress though, this doesn't have much to do with sexuality. I feels it's a good example though.

It was though. Islam is an abrahamic religion based on the same foundation of christianity. Puritanism was born because the early puritans felt that the at the time modern religious organization was not being literal enough and being too lax with their interpretation of religious text.

Not really. One fundamentalist christian will disagree with another fundamentalist christian about topics. There is, I dunno a good word for them so I'll just go with "Ideal", ideal morals like "Do not kill" and "Do not steal" that are well and good in our society today but someone 1000 years ago and even today would disagree with. An Anarchist for example doesn't believe in personal property rights and so stealing as a concept doesn't exist for them like it does for someone in a capitalist society.

The only real thing we need to do is insure that everyone is granted their basic rights, their right to life, their right to live and strive for what they want, and protect that and punish those who seek to take that right away.

No, I'm saying that if you have a community that aren't taught and reinforced to learn about proper protection and self preservation they're gonna get fucked. I mean look at trannies. I garuntee you if we taught trannies all about the surgery and forced them to attend private support groups with people who also had the surgery, and went through therapy we would drastically reduce the numbers of transitions. The point is that western gay culture is based on San fran's hedonistic culture and this is a huge problem, as you can see through SJWs. The marxists latched onto it and are forcing their shit into it.

Irrelevant, because gays don't control who they want to bone so there has to be something in the world that creates that.

You missed the point. They're just as destructive to society as gay people because they refuse to breed the way you want them to.

I never made the case for science. I made the case for basic logic starting with "everyone has the right to the pursuit of happiness." If we made laws based on science we would become significantly more tyrannical I'd think, just like if any one other group controlled the general populace.

All research ever has been done for political reasons. A lot of it has such a minuscule impact on our lives that it doesn't matter in the end. Other times it tells us nothing but statistical information.

Being gay doesn't magically make the man sterile. They're in the same boat because they could potentially have children but they choose not to. And that's not even the case with some gay people who choose to procreate with surrogates. Ability to procreate isn't an issue here, the ability or desire to have offfspring with one's partner leads to the same outcome. The process aren't the same but it leads to the same outcome so I don't understand why you have a problem with a gay couple and not with a married man and woman who choose not to have kids.

Do you also happen to be middle eastern and agree with the religion of Islam?

Well hey, you could just live and let live. Or you can be a faggot constantly bitching about how a group of people should fix something that cannot be fixed in the first place.
You chose option 2, so put your money where your mouth is and find a fix or fuck off.

ooh look its destiney

IT HAS BEGUN

...

not even good porn, look at that horrible grayline work, that horrible hands and feet, the lack of any real lewd at all, the fact that they look like fucking deformed vegans who need to eat a burger, this is awful.

...

I don't give a fuck about the movie itself, I'm just pissed that the boy isn't massively confused to be all over another boy.

If it was so fucking easy, there wouldn't be any closetfags.

Try me. :3

All sex besides the most vanilla sex for the purpose of procreation is "hedonistic" by that definition. But there is a difference between private hedonism like guilty pleasure, and looking to give your loved one joy, and the type of hedonism that goes on in pride parades and in general in the west side of the US in commiefornia. There is a big difference between them. One is a personal choice, a "guilty pleasure", though that term doesn't exactly fit.

If you were really against personal hedonism you'd be against things like birth control in any form, the entertainment industry including comic books, television, movies, video games, and other such physical things we buy ourselves to keep ourselves happy and fill our time.

Mass cultures like that aren't developed because of biology. Biology based cultures don't work on a grand scale especially in modern society. However if you look at the culture in california and the culture of the "gays" in the US they're pretty fucking identical. Saying they aren't related is pretty fucking retarded when shit like that just doesn't happen by coincidence.

I also never used the word victim. A culture can't be a victim.

Zappa a best

Fuck off back to Holla Forums, or better yet the Holla Forums cuck squad's origin point Holla Forums, or better still just kill yourself.

What, you think kleenex commercial characters are decent design?

rope self and relieve us all of your idiocy

I'm beginning to think this constant accusation by sodomites may very well be a case of projection on their part. Rather ironic, if true.

Where's the rest? Aren't I supposed to reply with some magically memetic sentence?

2369 "By safeguarding both these essential aspects, the unitive and the procreative, the conjugal act preserves in its fullness the sense of true mutual love and its orientation toward man's exalted vocation to parenthood."157
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm#2363

I'm visiting. Not staying.

How about you piss off back to 4chan, underage piece of shit. Grow hair on your balls before you talk to the adults.

If faggots scare you so much you must be the biggest pussy faggot amongst the faggots.

...

...

Worst christians.

Couldn't remember where I saved those particular numbers, but here's from a quick Ixquick search:
carm.org/statistics-homosexual-promiscuity
What did you have in mind?

You think this society is healthy and fine?

Where? Because I recall writing that "what I'm looking for is a cultural change that doesn't place more power in the hands of the few". Maybe the last bit wasn't clear enough, but it means "I don't want the state meddling in the length of skirts by way of lawmaking."

In a lot of ways relevant to this conversation, the old day were better. Divorce rates were lower, people didn't claim gender was just a social construct, and homosexuals weren't celebrated for winning oppression Olympics.

Well, obviously no one wants things that are offensive to them. This could be anything. You're effectively not saying anything here.
Where the hell do you get that from? Did I say it should be illegal for a woman to show her ankles?
And you call me fundamentalist. Not an argument. Refer to George Carlin on that subject.

Gee, could this have anything to do with their sexual culture?
They're carrying small human shields. As long as that's the case, society will have to get to a very bad spot before taking money away from single mothers becomes politically viable. Single motherhood must be prevented in the first place.
How? Keep telling them that fatherhood is "hip" and that absent fathers are "super lame"? "Encouragement" is pretty vague, makes me think of cheerleaders. One particular bit of law-giving I would entirely agree with is outlawing divorce without serious reasons and evidence for those - a bit of regression, I suppose.

"Oh look at me, I'm from Holla Forums, I'm an edgy fucking bitch hacking the opposition because I can't have any success on my own."

God 4chan is such faggotry nowadays. I miss fucking 2007, when embarrassing conspiracy theorist cults were the victims and not the bullies. When Myspace profiles were destroyed, by the same dudebro faggots who run that place now.
When cancer was driven out instead of invited and discussed.
When 4chan wasn't Leddit.

Piss off to your shithole, alt right newfag.

user, I…

...

Where do you think we are?

>carm.org/statistics-homosexual-promiscuity
Literally all that info is from the 1970s-1990s. The article literally took information from studies and books made by christians in the 1970s through 1990s and recited it word for word as if culture hasn't changed in 20-40 years. Like I said, Statistics have context and you're not giving the whole context and framing it to suit your own personal bias.

It's perspective user. "society as a whole is utter cancer! We're degenerating!" Meanwhile this society has the best medicine ever made, the quality of life is ridiculously high, wars no longer have so many needless casualties, and most international problems are fixed through discussion. You're proposing a christian state basically mirroring Islam but with the retarded cherry picking of which religious laws to follow, based on your personal opinion on "when society was better!" and it has never been better until this very point. Even if you're a retard who thinks the SJW trend will last, it wont, the public elected fuckin Donald Trump and the media is hemorrhaging money as the next generation gets their news from alternative sources online.

We never had that. If we left it up to the masses then Hillary would be president. Popularity doesn't ensure quality. I do agree we need to downsize more to a state level, but that is an ongoing process.

They weren't.
Are a problem, but it's more to do with the fact that we live in a highly material culture that values highly material things. There is no incentive to stay with a person because there is still a large stigma about therapy and divorce seems like an easy way out. What we need is to kill this stigma about therapy and give more incentive to stay married, especially for parents with kids.

That's a fad that is pretty much dying. Everyone makes fun of it.

You're about 10 years too late on that one. Muslims are winning the oppresion olympics. Gay males are no longer an oppressed class according to the progressive stack.

You just defeated your own point.

I'm sorry, I misinterpreted your paragraph long rant about gays to be a genuine opinion and not a shitposting meme you only half heartedly believe in.

Questions aren't points. Questions usually are deflections or you're digging for a point to say "HAHAHA GOTCHA!" on.

just so you know that shit happens IRL.

Don't ever trust a flamer. They're good indicators though. If your girlfriend is friends with a flamer I'd say dump the bitch ASAP. She's more than likely a fag hag and the flamer is only friends with her to get at her boyfriend. Flaming gays are basically the gay equivalent to a blonde bimbo who will do anything to be on top.

Do you have any opposing statistics?

I don't need opposing statistics to know that they're out of date and not any where close to true, especially considering the context and culture of those periods, it actually makes sense.

Flamers, trannies, and anyone on /cuteboys/. Avoid all of them if you wanna keep your sanity. Whether your gay or not. Just stay away. They're all insane.

You kind of do. If you're making the claim that those statistics are no longer accurate or that they never were then you need something to back that up.

No, I don't. It's basic logic that cultural or societal statistic have a limited window of relevance. There is a reason most governments revise them YEARLY, if even that long. What is relevant in 1994 is not relevant in 2014 much less in 2017. General consensus and attitudes have changed. That's not even saying anything about how the studies were conducted. Hell, the few statistics in the original article that have had newer statistics to replace them are so ridiculously wrong, like the suicide rate which has dropped significantly after they've become generally "accepted". Turns out when you stop needlessly discriminating and being culturally positive or neutral on a group of people things like suicide rate drops.

You're basically saying that culture and society hasn't evolved at all in over 30 years. I don't need a opposing statistics, you need better statistics. You're literally no better than the retards screaming that video games cause violence or misogyny or your typical SJW citing wage gap studies.

I hate this fucked up era we are living!

And lots of things are worse. For example, back in the day, Sweden practised eugenics. Now they practice genetic suicide. Just because some things are better than they were in the past, doesn't mean other things can't have become worse, and that a return to some past practices in those cases won't be of substantial benefit.
The only law-making I've seriously suggested is the outlawing of frivolous divorce. Please stop putting words in my mouth.

Maybe we're not talking about the same old days. I'm thinking of a couple of decades back, like the fifties. Maybe you're thinking a few centuries?

Married people seems not to have required therapy until modern times.
No amount of therapy is going to turn a ho into a house-wife, not a good one anyway. You can't live your entire life one way, and then expect to turn around and live a completely different way from one day to the next, not without a lot of trouble. And no therapist can compete with everyone else a woman surrounds herself with (the surrounding culture), and if most of those people are whores, she's going to be a whore - because to most people, especially women, "normal" is synonymous with "right".

I hope so. I'll believe it when I see it ridiculed in mainstream media. That's pretty much the important part; the cessation of the attempt to undermine sexual sanity.

Incidental, not my point. The LGBTBBQ club are part of it, they help keep it going in the name of sexual "acceptance and tolerance".

My point was that "inoffensive" wasn't a much better choice of word than "femininity". And I don't see how offence matters one way of the other in regards to the dynamics of sex and marriage.

Which paragraph? We're talking about female sexual behaviour here. Modern homosexuality and female promiscuity are only (okay, probably mainly) related to each other through the sexual liberation.

I think those question you refer to were rhetorical questions. But seriously, how do you propose
Because I don't think it's the men who are the problem.

individuals 18-35 years of age from the National Survey of Family Growth surveys collected between 2002 and 2013.
bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-11-189

Typical faggot brain encrusted in semen

Indeed! Now that faggotry has been accepted at large by the morally relativistic masses I expect promiscuity to have shot straight up!

On 4chans trashcan, for everyone who feels too opposed on a more active board.

Then go back

I think he might be opposed to the more active boards there.

rip werewolf jones uwu

4U

The entire idea of the whoreshoo theory """"works"""" when it's applied to politics as presented by the mainstream media to dumb masses.
If you're talking to Auntie Gertrude who has no idea how economy or sociology work, and speaks in election slogans, then for her, the horseshoe theory is a perfectly valid explanation of why there are faggots burning cars in the streets, as well as rednecks trying to shoot random niggers down.
It's a perfect explanation for them. Heck, if it wasn't tailored specifically for this type of people, it wouldn't use a neat visual comparison.

Obviously, trying to use the "theory" on anybody who has even a marginal understanding of politics is plain retarded.

You had one job.

It was decent I guess.

That's not horsehoe theory. Horseshoe theory is that in the end both extreme right and extreme left will do away with the same thing, and strive for the same goals, literally the only different is how they want to do it, and they'll trample on anyone's rights to do it.

So literally the golden means fallacy?

Pretensions of peaceful dialogue?
A better world?
Rights are always right and should never be questioned!

...

This sounds like a politician talk than an edgy Holla Forumsack to be honest.

Pics related.

Still the same shit as before.

That's an outright lie. Centrists believe in not having extreme governments on either end of the spectrum, they believe that incorporating ideas from both ends will make a better government in the long run.

Just because someone isn't outright retarded enough to buy into your ideology doesn't mean that they don't have any beliefs.

Look at the title of the pics.

I was being sarcastic.

Gays eliminated

Kill it.

I was thinking the same thing, the other kid returning the advances was silly unlikely.

1/2

Seriously nigga ?
The subject was about perfectly 40 year old normal human female and not something else.

No
Have a group of 200 gay subjects.
Ultimately the group dies and nothing subsist, 0 chance.
Have a group of 200 subjects who don't want to have kids.
There's a least one chance that one of the couple changes their mind and have children's, thus something subsist.
?
Do you understand how humans breed ?
Female + female = can't have kids
Male + Male =can't have kids
This isn't me or anyone else forcing them to "breed" it's natural barriers.

There's a balance to achieve at some point, you can't make decision based only on the "desire to pursue happiness" or to just follow science.
But it isn't exclusively closed to these two.
For example a pragmatical approach nowadays is to reduce human population to two billion, how ? a peaceful approach would be modern eugenics but this requires acceptance of the human populace which will never happen and ultimately lead to our doom.

So research on supernovas and cosmical radiologic background is made because of political reasons ?
No not all research are political.
What I mean is that the results and researches can be cherry picked, can be influenced by political/religious/unfounded beliefs.

There are indeed a lot of researches made that aren't influencing us directly but those who are, are making a change.
You have to also take into account those who are directly affecting via memetics it influences large groups of humans (baitclick articles etc…).
Since when statistical information isn't science ?
It's the whole point of science.
Statistical information helps to understands the nature of everything.
For example I make a force test on a specific metal alloy I tested, register the breaking point.
The same metal alloy come but this time you'll change the room temperature and registers when it break.
Etc…
The whole mass of data you gather on the alloy temps, rigidity, acidity, flexibility etc… is statistical information that you compare to know what it does, how it reacts under certain conditions and to know when to use it.

2/2
I don't agree they aren't in the same boat.
I don't agree because I don't put surrogates has a valid way of conceiving a child (and yes I also include the unfortunate sterile people).
A gay male/female can't have children because of his attractiveness to the same sex.
If the said gay male/female chose to have a children naturally, the said gay is bisexual or forced himself against his non-attractiveness of the opposite sex.
I have no opinions for bisexual people but for gays who can't procreate with a loved partner and have to ask to a external source to make the the child is a great form of hypocrisy and dangerous behaviour.
Might has just have children from artificial pods.
I suggest that you read "brave new world".

Do you have to consider every opinion opposing yours has a great evil ?
Middle east, islam and many Arabs, Indian and African country are a mess that I hope get their shit back together one day (that or being removed).
I'm just being pragmatic and try to find the right path with correct information.
Not doing so has already lead us to terrible mistakes.
I often try to often remember myself that:
This is I think one of the most important quotes with:
These two are very important, because first of all you force yourself to make research all the time before having an opinion.
Second if you have made extended research you'll probably have a lot of knowledge on the past too.
And you'll then see some repetitive patterns.
Patterns that could be have been avoided if people would make decisions based on facts instead of beliefs.

I already do but with some limits.
Gee I wonder what was the purpose of those studies that weren't correctly made.

Typical human behaviour
Humans work in group, there's no unique saviour.
The unique saviour behaviour is one of the reasons of what is holding us in this shitty era.

It means they donated to a kickstarter.

No the subject was gays. The 40 year old childless woman was brought up because "Gays don't produce any children!" and neither does a menopausal old woman. It's pointless arguing about it now because someone somewhere dropped the other examples as well, proving that the point was moot.

Stop reddit posting. First off, we're not talking about "EVERYONE SHOULD BE GAY!" we're talking about gay culture and it's relation to san francisco culture. Did you even read the argument? It's pretty obvious that if you had a society of people who didn't breed then you wouldn't procreate. It's pretty pointless to even bring up since gay people are barely 5% of the population if even that. The original point here was that gay couples could have surrogates or go through adoption.

That was my point.

As for eugenics, that's not the way to go. I'm of the opinion that the sudden burst of gay people in the population is some weird evolutionary backup to provide more caregivers and less breeders. We could easily just push for more adoptions in general as well.

It is. Research and discoveries are bragging rights for governments. The entire reason governments provide funding and grants to research is so they can discover stuff first. That's why in war time between two larger powers there is a sudden boom in scientific and technological advancement. Researching space, is inevitably, about knowing enough about it so we can later colonize it as a species.

It is a science, though it has more to do with mathmatics than any real science. It's not a true science in that regard. It's literally just numbers that people cite when they have an agenda.

I'd love for you to explain why it isn't valid. It produces a child. thus conceiving a child.

How is it either of those things? You're not being clear enough.

No. I'm simply stating that this way of life that is being offered is literally no different than this other one except in the most specific of ways. They're both abrahamic religions after all, denying they aren't similar or they aren't based on the same ideas is outright denial of reality. The main difference is Christianity has evolved as this country has progressed and Islam hasn't. Do you have to respond to everything with hyperbole?

I don't even know what you're responding to here. You talk about "learning from the past" but you also talk about regressing society and invalidating forms of science because your personal opinion (such as surrogates and such).

How is this any better than faggotry? Most girls who give birth at a young age end up dying.

I thought it was cute, lighten up.

it's gonna flop right?
bet it'll flop.
all lefty agenda pushing movies tend to

It's not a movie (just a short)

get pozzed faggot

No

Big deal, Holla Forums. Get over yourselves.

Implying gays haven't tried fixing themselves?
Say you find yourself early on in life the only person in your circle who is not attracted to the opposite sex, and thus in the future cannot live a normal life and make children to pass your genes to… Would your first reaction be
or
?

Think about it, why would anyone find himself against human nature/his community's beliefs and NOT do something about it? Every gay person has went through the "I should fix this" phase before accepting that they are who they are.
Some try religion and "repenting" for their sins, some try getting psychological help, some try conditioning themselves, some try being celibate, and some simply give up and kill themselves.
Guess which of these fixed homosexuality? That's right, none!

It has been proven that it cannot be fixed even despite all the attempts made to fix it since decades ago to this very day. Yet you come here and claim that it can be fixed, well put your money where your mouth is and fix it faggot.

Well at least this shitty thread can't be bumped now.

You need evidence to support a claim.

Well of course it can and you would realize that too by realizing what being gay really is: a mental illness. Now you might saying that the first thing someone might think when they have a problem is that I have to fix myself, but its actually quite the opposite. Human behavior has constantly showed that people tend to try and change the world around them much more than themselves and usually only "fix" themselves when a desperate situation needs it. Beforehand when the number of fags was lower the likelihood of them fixing themselves was very low due to this fact as well as people viewing them as sinners according to the bible and not as people that needed help. The fact that fags don't try to fix themselves is still a prominent factor today but its more so that they can't fix themselves due to a lack of confidence. I understand your frustration at the fact that a viable psychological cure or treatment hasn't been found (though this is probably the fault of the horrid mess that the psychological community has been for the last 50-60 years) yet it still can be treated under the right circumstances. Its like from that old greentext from Holla Forums where the dude found out his buddy was starting to act that way and he got pissed at him but later decided to help him by taking him to the gym, restoring his confidence and supporting his recovery. This could work because it tackles the things that brought upon his change in the first place: low confidence, a weak body, low testosterone, the fear of not being wanted and a lack of support in his life leading to him giving in to delusions to give his life more meaning. Obviously you would never see such a treatment for gays (or any other type of mental illness from the same roots for that matter) from any self-respecting clinic in the modern times of 2017. This coupled with the huge amount of gay-acceptance propaganda in every form of media for about 20 years and the fuck-ton of xenoestrogens in the products, food and water lowering the average testosterone rate of males every year and you get an illness which is apparently incurable. But to be honest with you, the few people who would be able to recognize it as being a metal illness would probably not be able to do anything about it without being branded a "homophobe" and get casted out of that person's life. Even if it can be cured, the odds of being able to do it in the current year is abysmal at best and severally damaging to the person trying to cure them at worst.

Of not being wanted sexually I mean

>>>/bog/

Unbelievable. Normalfags should stop fooling themselves. Everyone knows that the ginger fag would probably go on and ditch the homo spic for a black man. That's the extent of gay "love", shallow promiscuity.