Guess I'll miss TGP

[Zer0th]

You know how porn sites occasionally publish their top terms by state? It's always exactly what these populations are publicly associated with condemning/criticizing/persecuting, i.e., conservative bible belt people getting off to black / inter-racial, etc. Thanks to this thread I'm just going to go ahead and assume a good chunk of rig-talk has one tab open to the "Steve Stevens vs. Brown Eye" thread and the next tab open to ...well...I can't think of anything gayer than that, but you get the point... Macho dude-ism overcompensating for repressed desires.

Ding, ding, ding... http://www.psychologytoday.com/files/u4 ... _et_al.pdf

Unlike humans, strain gauges don't lie [to themselves or others]

 

[ripleyripley]

Personally, I prefer handling things bare-handed, but I can wield any weapon with skill whether it's a firearm or staff. I don't necessarily "love" or particularly have a passion for them, but they are fun and I wouldn't trade my weapons skills for

Seriously? You may be right on every point you made but this is too much! If someone like Charveldan had said this, the internet would explode and there would be a zillion people with this as their signature line...

 

[BYTOR]

Many things go wrong at birth................gays are just boys born with too much female hormones & Lesbians are girls born with too much male hormones. It can also be an imbalance in their brains. Hence the attraction to their same sex.

Was it meant to be this way.....of course not.....just like Down Syndrome, Autism & all birth defects in general. Things just go wrong in this imperfect world of ours.........

This doesn't apply to those who just experiment for kicks at some point (kinky?? experimental??).............I'm talking the folks we all know & see from a young age that obviously just have no choice in the matter. You can just tell they have no choice..........

Therefore ya gotta be sympathetic & have tolerance.

 

[ubermetaldood]

Erm, I'd defintiely say that "having an aversion to homosexuals" counts as homophobia no? Also you say you don't like them, there's homophobia right there in black and white! If you said you didn't like and had an aversion to black people would that be racist? I'm sure it would be.

.....the assumption that someone is homophobic just because they are averse to homosexuality is plain stupid.

By DEFINITION, anyone that is "averse" to homosexuals or homosexuality is "homophobic".

For your reference: "Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT). It can be expressed as antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, or hatred, may be based on irrational fear, and is sometimes related to religious beliefs."

First of all, you illiterate fucking Wikipedia scholars, you don't even know what phobia or aversion means. A person can be averse to something but that certainly doesn't constitute a fucking phobia. If someone is grossed out by people who pick their noses, that doesn't mean they have a phobia. Being averse to homosexuality or homosexuals doesn't constitute a phobia. Evidently in your simple minds that's the case, but to anyone who is marginally informed, you are just ignorant.

If you really wanted to get down to the meaning of a phobia, try using a credible source like the DSM instead of Wikipedia.

"A. Marked and persistent fear that is excessive or unreasonable, cued by the presence or anticipation of a specific object or situation (e.g., flying, heights, animals, receiving an injection, seeing blood).

B. Exposure to the phobic stimulus almost invariably provokes an immediate anxiety response, which may take the form of a situationally bound or situationally predisposed Panic Attack.
Note: In children, the anxiety may be expressed by crying, tantrums, freezing, or clinging.

C. The person recognizes that the fear is excessive or unreasonable. Note: In children, this feature may be absent.

D. The phobic situation(s) is avoided or else is endured with intense anxiety or distress.

E. The avoidance, anxious anticipation, or distress in the feared situation(s) interferes significantly with the person's normal routine, occupational (or academic) functioning, or social activities or relationships, or there is marked distress about having the phobia."

Like I stated earlier, having an aversion to homosexuals doesn't automatically translate to hatred or fear. See the problem is that you have been brainwashed and don't have the capacity to think independently from what you have been taught. You have been conditioned to accept homosexuality because if you don't, then you're homophobic blah, blah, blah. I'm just being honest here and discussing things on a level aberrant from politically-correct thought. If you want to apply narrow-minded, politically-correct standards to a discussion, then don't try to participate in an intelligent discussion because you will be out of your depth.

Oi mate... suck twelve dicks.

Okay, now we've got that out of the way:

1. I didn't mention conservatism. At all. You did. For all you know, I am a dyed in the wool Tory.
2. Being averse to someone because of their sexual preferences is fucking stupid.

A person like you would think of something like "suck twelve dicks." That's just pathetic really. Also, dummy, it's not an aversion to someone's "sexual preference." A preference is a choice someone makes, but it is widely accepted that homosexuality is not a choice but an inherent proclivity towards members of the same sex. Therefore, to say that homosexuality is a "preference" is incredibly ignorant of you.

That's like saying that someone is averse to homosexuals because of the choice they made to be homosexual. Again, to make another clear example: If someone is averse to people who pick their noses or lick their fingers when they share food, that doesn't automatically mean they have mysophobia. It simply means that they like to be clean and not share germs. Certainly many people don't care how picks their noses or licks their fingers, but deviating from that frame of mind doesn't make one phobic.

Many things go wrong at birth................gays are just boys born with too much female hormones & Lesbians are girls born with too much male hormones. It can also be an imbalance in their brains. Hence the attraction to their same sex.

Was it meant to be this way.....of course not.....just like Down Syndrome, Autism & all birth defects in general. Things just go wrong in this imperfect world of ours.........

This doesn't apply to those who just experiment for kicks at some point (kinky?? experimental??).............I'm talking the folks we all know & see from a young age that obviously just have no choice in the matter. You can just tell they have no choice..........

Therefore ya gotta be sympathetic & have tolerance.

Read the aforementioned. It's just plain stupid and arrogant of you to say it's a matter of sympathy and tolerance. It's stupid because people like you have believe that you are supposed to ignore it and go on as if it doesn't gross you out. I'm sorry buddy, but having a man look at you with desiring eyes might flatter you, but I personally think it's gross. It's also entirely arrogant of you because, like typical liberals, being "sympathetic and tolerant" makes you feel like you're better than others who don't share the same beliefs. The fact is, no amount of brainwashing can erase biology.

Let's say you are at a bar and a guy next to you starts talking to you. He seems interested in more than platonic conversation and is inclined to touch your shoulder or elbow as the two of you regale amongst your beer and bar peanuts. Then after some length of conversation, he feels comfortable enough to place his hand near penis and gesture that you should depart together to a more private environment.

Well, would you not feel any discomfort? Would you feel some degree of flattery? Would you gently remove his hand and say "Sorry, I'm not like that." and continue your conversation, or would you feel the urge to exit the situation? Would you feel aroused or would you feel repulsed?

According to your logic, if you feel any amount of discomfort, repulsion, or an urge to leave the situation, you are unsympathetic and intolerant and homophobic. Therefore, you have to honestly consider whether you have an aversion to homosexuality or an attraction towards it. There doesn't seem to be any middle ground because it's highly unlikely that a person would be completely numb to the situation and not have feelings of either aversion or arousal.

Therefore, consider your own intolerance of truth and honesty.

 

[rlord1974]

^ thanks for sharing your knowledge with us. Everyone other than you will always be wrong, just as you will always be right - and homophobic.

Enjoy your "aversion".

 

[anomaly]

Shit apple

 

[cardinal]

Someone just lock this thread already or at least move it to off topic.

 

[ubermetaldood]

^ thanks for sharing your knowledge with us. Everyone other than you will always be wrong, just as you will always be right - and homophobic.

Enjoy your "aversion".

Feeble way of avoiding an argument you are losing. Enjoy your ignorance.

 

[jcj]

Well this one went wheels off!

Since we''re deep in it, I'll throw in my .02.

My business partner was anti gay marriage, but very pro RKkBA, right up until I pointed out the incredibly hypocritical nature of his position. He doesn't dig government legislating away people's rights (nor do I) but had this knee jerk reaction to gay marriage. Problem here, is it's the SAME thing; it's a civil right.

You don't get to have it both ways.

I have several gay friends, that I hang out with on a fairly regular basis (I'm a married father of three); no one has ever tried to grab my ass, jam their tongue down my throat, get me to pick up the soap, or looked at me with "desiring eyes"

A gay man doesn't want to sleep with every man he encounters, any more than most straight men want to sleep with every woman they encounter.

As long as you're not a danger to others, live your life as you will.

Pro 2A guys should really think hard about their position on gay rights.

 

[BYTOR]

Let's say you are at a bar and a guy next to you starts talking to you. He seems interested in more than platonic conversation and is inclined to touch your shoulder or elbow as the two of you regale amongst your beer and bar peanuts. Then after some length of conversation, he feels comfortable enough to place his hand near penis and gesture that you should depart together to a more private environment.

The whole scenario you map out above seems to have happened to you, but you left out the part where you actually did leave with the guy & got yourself butt fucked

Most of us "normal" dudes would never get passed the "He seems interested in more than platonic conversation" part that you wrote without bailing then & there

I think you need to come out the closet dude ............I'll try to be sympathetic & tolerant

 

[jcj]

The whole scenario you map out above seems to have happened to you, but you left out the part where you actually did leave with the guy & got yourself butt fucked

Most of us "normal" dudes would never get passed the "He seems interested in more than platonic conversation" part that you wrote without bailing then & there

I think you need to come out the closet dude ............I'll try to be sympathetic & tolerant

Laughed my ass off!!!!

 

[Stumplegriltskin]

TGP and Seymour Duncan suck suck equally, and are both run by and chock full of hypocrite, liberal douchebags. I hate Seymour Duncan most for their tolerance (or more like support) of anti-American sentiment, Marxism, and flamboyant liberalism. I enjoy the company in an international community (being an international man and speaking in two other languages myself), but I won't tolerate someone badmouthing my country; especially when the core of America is still the greatest country on Earth.

If I can recall correctly, TGP started out with some kind of Christian affiliation or something. I guess they abandoned Jesus when they started getting endorsements. Anyway, I don't know if they consider themselves conservative there, but they CERTAINLY act like intolerant, liberal pricks. If they consider themselves conservative, they should be ostracized from the conservative population because they certainly don't operate like us.

for what it's worth, checking "Asian/Pacific Islander" on college applications, for example, might make it harder than declaring as simply Caucasian. You can look into it yourself, but basically Asians at colleges are "over represented" relative to their numbers in the general population, so they tend to be held to higher admissions standards.

Trust me, for that and many other reasons, it does "pay to be white" in the US.

Sorry but you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Asians aren't over-represented. They've always been a small and slowly increasing minority in this country, and the main reason they are held to higher standards is because they don't rely on entitlements and hold themselves to a higher standard. On the other hand, if you technically want to discuss over-representation of minorities, then you need to consider the black population. Most people have no idea that the actual black population of the United States is only around 13-14%. Judging from everything on television, from advertisements to programming, the typical American or foreigner believes the black population of the U.S. is between 25% and 50%. If you don't believe that, then survey random Americans or foreigners on the street and ask them how much of the population they think is composed of black (of "African-American" to throw the politically correct term around).

White people are no longer a majority, and if anything, the most over-represented because most people believe that white people still outweigh everyone else. Our Hispanic population is nearly equal to the white population now. If you study government from the civil rights era until now, you will see that the government has put into place specific, expansive programs targeted at changing the physical make-up of the population. The aim of these programs is to reduce the white population and increase the black population. Asians, Native Americans, and Hispanics are not considered in these plans.

Take a look in any American classroom and interview any American student and see for yourself what part of American history they are most familiar with. These government integration programs are specifically aimed at any urban or suburban where there is a majority white population. This integration program is far more expansive and invasive than people are even aware of. Aside from the aforementioned, I'll present you with a couple of more stunning facts.

35% of the entire black population are employed by federal and state government. If black people are only 14% of the population, consider that ratio compared to any other race. Programs such as Obamacare and Obama's new proposal to provide *free* ("free" is a lie because it costs every taxpayer) are specifically aimed at increasing and empowering particularly the black population. Yes that may be a shocking comment to some of you, but when is the last time you or even most congressmen poured over Obamacare law pages? I've toiled through it more than most Americans and certainly more than Nancy Pelosi and can tell you that it's not hard to connect the dots.

The fact is that you should be more informed and not take things at face value because these are some of the truths facing us right now and if people were aware of and understood them, there would be outrage. Like I said, I'm presenting you with facts you can research your self. These programs, under the guise of "desegregation" (i.e. Dwight Eisenhower, Lyndon B. Johnson, etc...), are really "re-population" programs. If anyone is short-changed when it comes to government bias, it's Hispanic, Asian and Native American.

Agreed, the same type of CUNTS run the Acoustic Guitar Forum, which I'm banned as well for life. Southern Bible Belt Jesus Banging Douche Bags. Hey, if Jesus is your thing, fine, but can't stand the "worship" threads. "Played my guitar at worship" and this and that. And they say "no discussion about religion or politics." Fucking Losers Cotton and the little miserable douche bag that owns the forum.

I forgot that TGP use to be a JEEZUS site. Again, no offense. If Jesus is your thing, fine. Doesn't work for me. So for so good with this place. Haven't pissed anybody off yet, LOL.

I'm neither liberal or conservative. I'm a human on Earth. I do not fuck with people, mentally or physically and that's about it. I CAN NOT stand people that thing they have power over others, especially douche bag asshole power hungry forum moderators.

 

[rlord1974]

^ thanks for sharing your knowledge with us. Everyone other than you will always be wrong, just as you will always be right - and homophobic.

Enjoy your "aversion".

Feeble way of avoiding an argument you are losing. Enjoy your ignorance.

OK, let's really peel back the layers on your disgusting onion then.

.....the assumption that someone is homophobic just because they are averse to homosexuality is plain stupid.

By DEFINITION, anyone that is "averse" to homosexuals or homosexuality is "homophobic".

For your reference: "Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT). It can be expressed as antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, or hatred, may be based on irrational fear, and is sometimes related to religious beliefs."

First of all, you illiterate fucking Wikipedia scholars, you don't even know what phobia or aversion means.

OK, would Merriam Webster work better for you, genius? Here's their definition of homophobia: "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals"

A person can be averse to something but that certainly doesn't constitute a fucking phobia.

I agree - in most cases. However, in certain contexts it does constitute a phobia. In this case, an aversion to homosexuals, or the act of homosexuality, is considered homophobia. I'm not interested in arguing with you further on this point - if you disagree, you can take it up with the editor of Merriam Webster or any number of other sources more reputable than yourself on this topic.

If someone is grossed out by people who pick their noses, that doesn't mean they have a phobia.

Actually, that is not necessarily true at all. Someone that is grossed out by this could have any number of phobias, such as Bacteriophobia, Blennophobia, Epistaxiophobia, Molysmophobia or Molysomophobia, amongst others.

Being averse to homosexuality or homosexuals doesn't constitute a phobia.

Again, according to people more reputable and well versed in homophobia, it does.

Evidently in your simple minds that's the case, but to anyone who is marginally informed, you are just ignorant.

Enlighten us with the sources of your unquestionable and undebatable "truths".

If you really wanted to get down to the meaning of a phobia, try using a credible source like the DSM instead of Wikipedia.

Of course, your references are irrefutable in relation to those quoted by others. And, as history has shown us, the American Psychiatric Association is infallible.

"A. Marked and persistent fear that is excessive or unreasonable, cued by the presence or anticipation of a specific object or situation (e.g., flying, heights, animals, receiving an injection, seeing blood). "Unreasonable fear"? Sounds like someone that gets anxiety and feels discomfort solely because another human being that happens to be homosexual might sit next to them and/or look at them in a desiring manner. Sound familiar?

B. Exposure to the phobic stimulus almost invariably provokes an immediate anxiety response, which may take the form of a situationally bound or situationally predisposed Panic Attack.
Note: In children, the anxiety may be expressed by crying, tantrums, freezing, or clinging.

C. The person recognizes that the fear is excessive or unreasonable. Note: In children, this feature may be absent.

D. The phobic situation(s) is avoided or else is endured with intense anxiety or distress.

E. The avoidance, anxious anticipation, or distress in the feared situation(s) interferes significantly with the person's normal routine, occupational (or academic) functioning, or social activities or relationships, or there is marked distress about having the phobia."

Like I stated earlier, having an aversion to homosexuals doesn't automatically translate to hatred or fear.

I never said an aversion to homosexuals translates to hatred or fear. I said an aversion to homosexuals constitutes homophobia which, as we have now covered a number of times in this thread, is a fact, given the contemporary definition of the phobia.

See the problem is that you have been brainwashed and don't have the capacity to think independently from what you have been taught.

Thanks for pointing out this fault of mine - I had no idea. You have an amazing ability to identify everyone else's problems and weaknesses, other than your own. Possessing a skill such as this, you might be a perfect candidate for a role at the American Psychiatric Association.

You have been conditioned to accept homosexuality because if you don't, then you're homophobic blah, blah, blah.

No, I have chosen to accept homosexuality because its a trait and condition of the human race, of which I am a part. I don't consider myself to be a "better" or more "correct" human being than any other. This is in stark contrast to yourself, where your comments in this thread have clearly demonstrated that you believe homosexuals are somehow lesser beings that do not deserve the same respect, rights and tolerance of others.

I'm just being honest here and discussing things on a level aberrant from politically-correct thought.

Sometimes, it's best to keep your opinions to yourself. Otherwise, you might inadvertently publicly disclose the fact that you are an intolerant homophobe.

If you want to apply narrow-minded, politically-correct standards to a discussion, then don't try to participate in an intelligent discussion because you will be out of your depth.

Clearly, as I am the only one in this conversation speaking from a place of acceptance, tolerance and maturity.

Good day.

 

[Stumplegriltskin]

1. I am a dyed in the wool Tory.
2. Being averse to someone because of their sexual preferences is fucking stupid.

I have no idea what #1 means....
As for #2?
Get your head out your ass people. My 17 Year old Daughter is Gay. Did I shoot her in the head for it? Nope...she is a great loving person that she has always been.

Good for you man. I thought that of my daughter for a while and you know what? I'd rather her be gay than get fucked over and pregnant by some young fool. LOL.
Seriously. Gay? Whatever, keep it away from me and I'm cool with it. But if you are gay, and admit it, you're gonna be made fun of. The same way I make fun of everyone else. I got a black friend. We call him Joe N***a. He calls us cracker bitches, or whatever. See, we're normal people and we can handle it. Just because someone is not at peace with themselves, whether it be because of sexual preference or political affiliation, or the color of their skin, don't go pulling the gay or race card on me because of it.

 

[LowDesertSludge]

I'm based in the UK, and one of my friends is a gay dude - yes, he loves the cock

Whaaaaaaaaaaaat...........go on...

You're ass is tighter than this thread!

 

[zuel69]

Sign of the times, if you express any distaste for fudge packing..your a homophobic racist...God help you if your in the public spotlight and say so.

 

[Mailman1971]

I'm based in the UK, and one of my friends is a gay dude - yes, he loves the cock

Whaaaaaaaaaaaat...........go on...

You're ass is tighter than this thread!

that's from years of squats and lunges. Keeps my girlish figure.

 

[thiswaythatway]

I'm surprised this guy didn't get banned for such a thread.

https://www.thegearpage.net/board/showth ... ?t=1525502

 

[ubermetaldood]

^ thanks for sharing your knowledge with us. Everyone other than you will always be wrong, just as you will always be right - and homophobic.

Enjoy your "aversion".

Feeble way of avoiding an argument you are losing. Enjoy your ignorance.

OK, let's really peel back the layers on your disgusting onion then.

.....the assumption that someone is homophobic just because they are averse to homosexuality is plain stupid.

By DEFINITION, anyone that is "averse" to homosexuals or homosexuality is "homophobic".

For your reference: "Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT). It can be expressed as antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, or hatred, may be based on irrational fear, and is sometimes related to religious beliefs."

First of all, you illiterate fucking Wikipedia scholars, you don't even know what phobia or aversion means.

OK, would Merriam Webster work better for you, genius? Here's their definition of homophobia: "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals"

A person can be averse to something but that certainly doesn't constitute a fucking phobia.

I agree - in most cases. However, in certain contexts it does constitute a phobia. In this case, an aversion to homosexuals, or the act of homosexuality, is considered homophobia. I'm not interested in arguing with you further on this point - if you disagree, you can take it up with the editor of Merriam Webster or any number of other sources more reputable than yourself on this topic.

If someone is grossed out by people who pick their noses, that doesn't mean they have a phobia.

Actually, that is not necessarily true at all. Someone that is grossed out by this could have any number of phobias, such as Bacteriophobia, Blennophobia, Epistaxiophobia, Molysmophobia or Molysomophobia, amongst others.

Being averse to homosexuality or homosexuals doesn't constitute a phobia.

Again, according to people more reputable and well versed in homophobia, it does.

Evidently in your simple minds that's the case, but to anyone who is marginally informed, you are just ignorant.

Enlighten us with the sources of your unquestionable and undebatable "truths".

If you really wanted to get down to the meaning of a phobia, try using a credible source like the DSM instead of Wikipedia.

Of course, your references are irrefutable in relation to those quoted by others. And, as history has shown us, the American Psychiatric Association is infallible.

"A. Marked and persistent fear that is excessive or unreasonable, cued by the presence or anticipation of a specific object or situation (e.g., flying, heights, animals, receiving an injection, seeing blood). "Unreasonable fear"? Sounds like someone that gets anxiety and feels discomfort solely because another human being that happens to be homosexual might sit next to them and/or look at them in a desiring manner. Sound familiar?

B. Exposure to the phobic stimulus almost invariably provokes an immediate anxiety response, which may take the form of a situationally bound or situationally predisposed Panic Attack.
Note: In children, the anxiety may be expressed by crying, tantrums, freezing, or clinging.

C. The person recognizes that the fear is excessive or unreasonable. Note: In children, this feature may be absent.

D. The phobic situation(s) is avoided or else is endured with intense anxiety or distress.

E. The avoidance, anxious anticipation, or distress in the feared situation(s) interferes significantly with the person's normal routine, occupational (or academic) functioning, or social activities or relationships, or there is marked distress about having the phobia."

Like I stated earlier, having an aversion to homosexuals doesn't automatically translate to hatred or fear.

I never said an aversion to homosexuals translates to hatred or fear. I said an aversion to homosexuals constitutes homophobia which, as we have now covered a number of times in this thread, is a fact, given the contemporary definition of the phobia.

See the problem is that you have been brainwashed and don't have the capacity to think independently from what you have been taught.

Thanks for pointing out this fault of mine - I had no idea. You have an amazing ability to identify everyone else's problems and weaknesses, other than your own. Possessing a skill such as this, you might be a perfect candidate for a role at the American Psychiatric Association.

You have been conditioned to accept homosexuality because if you don't, then you're homophobic blah, blah, blah.

No, I have chosen to accept homosexuality because its a trait and condition of the human race, of which I am a part. I don't consider myself to be a "better" or more "correct" human being than any other. This is in stark contrast to yourself, where your comments in this thread have clearly demonstrated that you believe homosexuals are somehow lesser beings that do not deserve the same respect, rights and tolerance of others.

I'm just being honest here and discussing things on a level aberrant from politically-correct thought.

Sometimes, it's best to keep your opinions to yourself. Otherwise, you might inadvertently publicly disclose the fact that you are an intolerant homophobe.

If you want to apply narrow-minded, politically-correct standards to a discussion, then don't try to participate in an intelligent discussion because you will be out of your depth.

Clearly, as I am the only one in this conversation speaking from a place of acceptance, tolerance and maturity.

Good day.

You obviously have very low reading comprehension - so the rest of these other dipshits who think that I'm preaching intolerance towards homosexuals. You are trying to play on the semantics of the terms, but you fail to capture not only the meaning of the terms in the context which they are applied, but with everything I stated thus far.

* I never said I was intolerant of gays.
* I never encouraged anyone to participate in gay-bashing.
* I never said one cross word about homosexuals except that it grosses me out personally (well, only as it applies to gay dudes because I dig hot chicks getting it on).

You can quote Merriam-Webster or any other dictionary you like, but I quoted you from the authoritative source (the DSM [Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). I doubt that Merriam-Webster is an authority on mental disorders. The fact is that a phobia is an "irrational" fear or intense aversion, and to qualify as a phobia, should meet the conditions which I quoted you before. Try to grasp the concept that an aversion doesn't automatically constitute a phobia. You insist on taking the term "aversion" to an extreme and over-expanding the term "phobia" in order to fit your idea of what homophobia is (typical liberal tactic). It's not even your individual idea of the term because it's the same doctrine the liberals have been pushing for many, many years.

You have the typical, pathetic liberal mindset. The same way liberals always think that if someone is conservative or opposes Obama then they must love George Bush, or if someone loves weaponry that they're racist rednecks from the south who support slavery, have only a few teeth left, are bible thumpers, etc... Therefore, according to your feeble logic, anyone who is not 100% in favor of homosexuality is homophobic. You are most certainly a liberal, and if you believe otherwise, you need to reconsider your entire philosophy because your mentality is 100% liberal. Given this fact, there is no amount of logic that will appeal to you because you are entirely bent on your faulty liberal ideals.

 

[Mailman1971]

Yeah I dont think of a guys hairy ass and get turned on myself either.

Each their own. Live and let live. But not my thing.