Gay Marriage

[Value Collector]

There is certainly anecdotal evidence amongst my homosexual friends, family members and acquaintances .

Am I the only one that doubts he actually has gay friends.:

Unless as I suspected a while back Tisme is one of those self hating closet gay men, who is out to publically oppose all things gay so as to misdirect attention from his inner struggle.

 

[Tisme]

Am I the only one that doubts he actually has gay friends.:

Unless as I suspected a while back Tisme is one of those self hating closet gay men, who is out to publically oppose all things gay so as to misdirect attention from his inner struggle.

So you take the piss out of gays to bolster your arguments when you deem fit?

I would suggest I am better qualified than you if you labour under the misconception that people with opinions about anything different to you must be distant from attachments.

snapshot sunshine: gay niece, gay nephew, two gay friends I play pool with down the pub, numerous gay friends in gay central Port Hedland. Helped a gay 50 yearold client friend declare his persuasion back in 1987 Brisbane when it was not a great idea and not only that helped him move to his lover in Sydney. So what have you done that makes you an expert on all things gay?

And why aren't I allowed to choose my own opinions without your distorted logic that tacks on illegitimate and diversionary fallacious arguments like "all men are root rats" when all men are not so, but perhaps you are?

 

[Value Collector]

So you take the piss out of gays to bolster your arguments when you deem fit?

?

No I was taking the piss out of you.

I would suggest I am better qualified than you if you labour under the misconception that people with opinions about anything different to you must be distant from attachments.

snapshot sunshine: gay niece, gay nephew, two gay friends I play pool with down the pub, numerous gay friends in gay central Port Hedland. Helped a gay 50 yearold client friend declare his persuasion back in 1987 Brisbane when it was not a great idea and not only that helped him move to his lover in Sydney.

You sound like a great friend, smiling to their face taking smack behind their back, or I guess you could just be lying.

 

[Tisme]

No I was taking the piss out of you.



You sound like a great friend, smiling to their face taking smack behind their back, or I guess you could just be lying.

I don't talk behind people's back and I don't PM members with defamatory content about members in a rally call support either.

You're a poor loser when things don't go the way you want aren't you. Even resort to calling people liars and name calling

This is how I see you and your cohorts ... no malice, just saddened how people can manipulated so easily:

 

[Value Collector]

I don't talk behind people's back and I don't PM members with defamatory content about members in a rally call support either.

]

What are you talking about? Are you trying to say I have sent someone a pm about you?

Are you saying these "gay friends" know the horrid opinions you have of them? And you talk openly with them about the disgust you feel as you do here?

 

[Tisme]

What are you talking about? Are you trying to say I have sent someone a pm about you?

Are you saying these "gay friends" know the horrid opinions you have of them? And you talk openly with them about the disgust you feel as you do here?

I am an open book cobber = WYSIWYG. I'm guessing you have to pussy foot around your gay cohorts, which is no way to treat a real friend is it...real friends weigh the good with the bad, comfort levels, etc.

None of us is defined by one issue and most of us are more equal than our circle of equal friends.

Misplaced ideas of justice served and community homogeneity denies all players their oblique individuality. A relentless march to the beige and obedient society that started to gain traction in the late eighties is fantastic for the mega industrialist who hanker for drone workers. Of course we are told we are a team and reward will come from the synergy that accrues = bullsh17, loss of the majority's freedom of expression is what's in play and this debate is just another spoke in the wheel.

When you grow older and wiser VC, you will choose whether to disconnect from engagement as so many lay down misere people do, or (if your generation hasn't shut the door on it by then) discuss your concerns about individual freedoms lost in your lifetime because debate has been shutdown with insult, litigation and misplaced empathies.

 

[luutzu]

You have just proved my argument that the objects of attention (gay men) are more likely to want sex, ie are more promiscuous.

Thanks for that.

QED.

No. Was putting what others said another way. I think they're right, but don't know the research etc.

Put it in economics term, it's supply and demand.

Men, in general, have high demand for sex. They'd screw anything and anyone. This include gay men.

Supply on the other hand, is low. i.e. Women are more selective - they gotta be in the mood, want a date out, a nice dinner and maybe a potential father-type. So women sex supply are few.

So straight men are heck out of luck - hence they have less sexual partners; have less sexual encounters.

 

[SirRumpole]

Men, in general, have high demand for sex. They'd screw anything and anyone. This include gay men.

So you are happy to have this description applied to yourself ?

Does your wife know what you get up to behind her back, or someone else's ?

 

[Value Collector]

I am an open book cobber = WYSIWYG..

What about Him (or her).

Are you saying I have PM'ed him or her about you?

I have no PM in either my inbox or outbox from Wysiwyg, and I have messages dating back to 2015 in there, In fact I can't remember ever senting a pm to wysiwyg even before that time on any subject, and if I have it certainly wasn't me that made contact.

What do you think I said about you? and who exactly has been saying I have been sending private messages about you? and when are they saying this happened?

I'm guessing you have to pussy foot around your gay cohorts, which is no way to treat a real friend is it...real friends weigh the good with the bad, comfort levels, etc.

No, I just find it hard to believe you can truly be a friend to people who you see as sub human, which with the way you speak about them I think you do.

 

[Value Collector]

Put it in economics term, it's supply and demand.

Men, in general, have high demand for sex. They'd screw anything and anyone. This include gay men.

.

Yep, its an evolution thing.

Through our evolutionary history, its been in the interest of the male to have as much sex with as many partners as possible, after all male can have 1000's of children in his life and leave the females to care for them, using the "shotgun approach" he is guaranteed to have a certain percentage to survive with good genes.

However female human can have relatively few children, so its in her interests to be selective with whom she mates, and select a partner with good genes whom is also going to be loyal and stay around and protect and provide for her few offspring.

the females hopes of spreading her genes are limited to the handful of children she can personally raise, she must make sure they have good genes and are protected, so is naturally going to be very selective.

A male can be less selective, because he has not limits to the number of children, he is not making a large commitment, he can impregnate and then move on.

--------------------------------

This is our evolutionary history, I am not making any statements about how we should structure our lives now.

 

[SirRumpole]

Yep, its an evolution thing.

Through our evolutionary history, its been in the interest of the male to have as much sex with as many partners as possible, after all male can have 1000's of children in his life and leave the females to care for them, using the "shotgun approach" he is guaranteed to have a certain percentage to survive with good genes.

However female human can have relatively few children, so its in her interests to be selective with whom she mates, and select a partner with good genes whom is also going to be loyal and stay around and protect and provide for her few offspring.

the females hopes of spreading her genes are limited to the handful of children she can personally raise, she must make sure they have good genes and are protected, so is naturally going to be very selective.

A male can be less selective, because he has not limits to the number of children, he is not making a large commitment, he can impregnate and then move on.

--------------------------------

This is our evolutionary history, I am not making any statements about how we should structure our lives now.

You are attempting to explain the facts , which is that gay males have more sexual partners than straight males ?

Do you deny this ?

Whatever the reasons for it the premise is true.

 

[Value Collector]

You are attempting to explain the facts , which is that gay males have more sexual partners than straight males ?

Do you deny this ?

Whatever the reasons for it the premise is true.

I don't think you can generalise it,

Do I think all gay men have more sexual partners than all straight men? No.

I mean I know straight guys that are in their 30's that have more than 100 sexual partners (including ones they paid), but I can't see how this affects anything.

One of my mates used to go to the brothels at least once a week that's (50 partners a year)for years, he is now married with kids, and given up the habit, but plenty of "happily married men" don't give up the habit.

There is probably more brothels in the greater Sydney area than their is gay clubs, not to mention all the girls that work from home or out call, plus the swingers clubs, fetish clubs, orgy groups etc, Just because straight men and women aren't talking about it, don't think for a minute there is not a subculture of straight men and women meeting up for sex whether it's paid for or swingers clubs etc.

 

[luutzu]

Yep, its an evolution thing.

Through our evolutionary history, its been in the interest of the male to have as much sex with as many partners as possible, after all male can have 1000's of children in his life and leave the females to care for them, using the "shotgun approach" he is guaranteed to have a certain percentage to survive with good genes.

However female human can have relatively few children, so its in her interests to be selective with whom she mates, and select a partner with good genes whom is also going to be loyal and stay around and protect and provide for her few offspring.

the females hopes of spreading her genes are limited to the handful of children she can personally raise, she must make sure they have good genes and are protected, so is naturally going to be very selective.

A male can be less selective, because he has not limits to the number of children, he is not making a large commitment, he can impregnate and then move on.

--------------------------------

This is our evolutionary history, I am not making any statements about how we should structure our lives now.

Trust you to science-backed our depravity. I thought we dudes are just animals all these times.

But yup, next time the missus complain, I'll say it's for survival of the species

 

[luutzu]

So you are happy to have this description applied to yourself ?

Does your wife know what you get up to behind her back, or someone else's ?

Oh she knows what I am like. But she also know I'm cheap and lazy, so it ain't gonna happen anywhere else.

Well, I like to think that I don't go around because I'm a busy man with honor and integrity. But cheap and lazy probably fit better.

I also subscribes to Frank Barronne's advise to Raymond: When you got a problem at home with your woman, don't go and get another woman. Then you'll have two problems!

 

[explod]

Marriage as a promise, a contract, agreement, understanding, commitment or whatever between two people is just that, no more, no less. And it is the business of the particular couple and no one elses business.

Half traditional marriages break up, again its their right and thier own business. And if you are gay, straight, upright or crooked, if its between two people its no one elses business. Anyone who says we should or should not do this or that (regardless of beliefs from heaven or fairyland) are interfearing full stop.

So we need to get over the crapola and our politicians need to do what they are paid to do and put it up for a vote on the democratic floor of our Parliament and see if the votes are there to create a law for same sex marriage or not. These minor, in my view, distractions are taking the communities minds away from the real problems we have with, jobs, education, affordable homes for all and a level tax playing field adinfanitum.

 

[noco]

Marriage as a promise, a contract, agreement, understanding, commitment or whatever between two people is just that, no more, no less. And it is the business of the particular couple and no one elses business.

Half traditional marriages break up, again its their right and thier own business. And if you are gay, straight, upright or crooked, if its between two people its no one elses business. Anyone who says we should or should not do this or that (regardless of beliefs from heaven or fairyland) are interfearing full stop.

So we need to get over the crapola and our politicians need to do what they are paid to do and put it up for a vote on the democratic floor of our Parliament and see if the votes are there to create a law for same sex marriage or not. These minor, in my view, distractions are taking the communities minds away from the real problems we have with, jobs, education, affordable homes for all and a level tax playing field adinfanitum.

The majority want a plebiscite ...FULL STOP....The fear of losing is in the Green Labor Party camp and they are not prepared to accept it.

 

[explod]

The majority want a plebiscite ...FULL STOP....The fear of losing is in the Green Labor Party camp and they are not prepared to accept it.

Absolute rubbish, I could not care one way or the other. But I very much do care about the huge amount of money the plebesite would waste over such a small issue when it could be dealt with in a flash on the floor of the Parliament by the people, that the peope put there, to get on with the job and make DECISIONS NOCO

And what majority, who's and what figures. And the press don't rule the roost either

 

[SirRumpole]

Absolute rubbish, I could not care one way or the other. But I very much do care about the huge amount of money the plebesite would waste over such a small issue when it could be dealt with in a flash on the floor of the Parliament by the people, that the peope put there, to get on with the job and make DECISIONS NOCO

And what majority, who's and what figures. And the press don't rule the roost either

It has been dealt with a number of times and the answer was no. Why not leave it at that ?

 

[luutzu]

Absolute rubbish, I could not care one way or the other. But I very much do care about the huge amount of money the plebesite would waste over such a small issue when it could be dealt with in a flash on the floor of the Parliament by the people, that the peope put there, to get on with the job and make DECISIONS NOCO

And what majority, who's and what figures. And the press don't rule the roost either

You have to give the plebs some appearance of democracy, I guess. Even if it cost them $160M for the pleasure - it's not like it's your money. Right?

For the hard stuff where your own conscience says yes; most of your constituents says yes; some of your religious voters says no; your donors doesn't care either way - it's best to let the plebs take the credits and the blame; let them take their focus away from the more important tasks of how much tax and state monopolies to give to corporations, how much to defund public services, what laws to pass to expand wars on terror...

 

[Tisme]

So straight men are heck out of luck - hence they have less sexual partners; have less sexual encounters.

Let's say you are right...is that that grounds for stable marriage and stable parenting?