Thursday, July 07, 2005
Adam on Homosexuality
Note: Due to the number of links, blogspirit did not allow Adam of The Metropolis Times's thoughts to be posted as a comment. They are well written and worth consideration, so I am posting them as a story instead. I will comment on them tomorrow. -- tdaxp
Homosexual sex is no more dangerous than heterosexual sex. Blaming the problem of unprotected sex on homosexuality is like blaming the Black Death on people handling rot with their left hands. There's as much need for the qualifier 'left' as there is 'homosexual'
Yes, many pre-modern cases are pederastic or otherwise non-egalitarian. In fact, this seems to be the norm among historical homosexuality, and you are correct in that egalitarian homosexuality is appearing more often. Whether its happening more often or its simply more out in the open is something no one can claim to know.
But there are also examples of a minority of romantic lovers of exclusively the same sex. Same-sex marriage even when members of the opposite sex were avaliable are no modern invention. Neither are men that freely perfer other men. These articles discuss the varities of homosexual conduct through history and make mention of the men who perferred men.
Neither is same-sex preference 'unnatural'
These took me about 10 minutes to find and read.
Here's an article on the "hijacking" of the word gay:
Sex that involves tissue tearing creates greater opportunities for infection. That's just biology. Anal sex common among homosexuals and dry vaginal sex common in Africa are both associated objectively with higher incidence of tissue tearing. The idea that homosexual sex is just as safe as regular heterosexual sex is simply not true biologically.
The cultural pathologies of US homosexuals include the "bug chaser" subculture, a deviant group that actively seeks to become HIV positive and explicitly look for HIV + sex partners. That's a public health menace.
Homosexual resistance to standard public health measures (closing down infection hot spots like gay bath houses) led to many deaths both inside the homosexual community and outside it during a time when we really didn't understand AIDS nearly well enough. Gay political pique caused many more deaths than is generally let on and the hemophiliac community was devastated as a consequence.
Posted by: TM Lutas | Friday, July 08, 2005
Great comment. Let me just add one thought
"Homosexual resistance to standard public health measures (closing down infection hot spots like gay bath houses) led to many deaths both inside the homosexual community and outside it during a time when we really didn't understand AIDS nearly well enough."
This is another case where the government should adopt netwar-like ("netpolitics"?) tactics -- managing a city in the manner of an occupying 4GW army.
The government should expect resistance from enemy networks. The authorities should have expected countermeasures by homosexualists. However, aggressive enforcement of existing laws can "run interference" against the enemy network, isolating them from themselves mentally (can't communicate) and physically (can't meet).
So in the example of bath houses, the authorities should have realized that attacking hotspots was only part of a solution, not a solution in itself.
Of course, you are right that the government did not realize the nature of the problem at the time.
Posted by: Dan | Friday, July 08, 2005
My first post at this great blog!
I wanna show u my dayly updated blog: Black Amateur Fuck Video
Have a nice day!
P.S. if you don't want to see this message please write me to email@example.com with subject "NO ADS" and URL of your forum
Thank you for cooperation!
Posted by: KurmanAhlabm | Thursday, November 13, 2008