[Maelstorm]

This guy is a leftist gay from the UK but once you get past the politically loaded word 'homophobe' it is a good article and more honest than you will normally ever get from guys of this persuasion.

Read it and then check out his latest latest jab Chikfila and Sarah Palin. What can I say a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut but is still blind.

https://twitter.com/JesseBering/status/229343895807483904

[Puckster]

Simple question, why is my disgust for homosexual behavior a “phobia” to begin with?

I don't fear them.......simply disgusted.

I also don't think that pedophilia is a nut that has fallen far from the homosexual tree....courtesy of Dan Savage, a frequent White House visitor.

[ansel12]

About time that they share this with us, too bad for military age males, many of them will be thrown out and sent to jail for their reactions in coming years.

[vbmoneyspender]

folk beliefs about children’s sexual impressionability.

more and more it seems that getting a post-graduate college education turns you into a moron when it comes to human nature.

[Mortrey]

“... his theory sound. Yet his studies are imperfect.”

Huh????

[verum ago]

Sometimes, science can be exceedingly rude—unpalatable, even. The rare batch of data, especially from the psychological sciences, can abruptly expose a society’s hypocrisies and capital delusions, all the ugly little seams in a culturally valued fable. I have always had a special affection for those scientists like Gallup who, in investigating highly charged subject matter, operate without curtseying to the court of public opinion. And, before anyone does so, what an absurd, spineless suggestion for science to refrain from engaging in any intellectual inquiry, from exploring theoretical possibilities, because we fear what we may learn about ourselves.

This little bit is definitely refreshing.

[ExxonPatrolUs]

I am reminded of Victoria Jackson's review of "Year One"

Why I Walked Out of ‘Year One’ Crying (Victoria Jackson)
Well, today I walked out of a Judd Apatow movie crying. It was the scene where the obese homosexual is fortune-telling by looking at the bowels of a sheep that has been sodomized by a person. The movie was “Year One.” I tried to be open-minded as I watched the first 20 minutes of masturbation, fornication, circumcision jokes, continual penis references, bestiality, violence, and Biblical blasphemy. I told myself this was a PG-13 movie and the writers were “lost” so they didn’t know how vulgar they were being. I looked at the ten-year-old and his father sitting next to me. I must be old-fashioned or something. But, then I noticed no one was laughing. No one was walking out either. I was hoping that the crude jokes were flying over the heads of the poor children who were sitting there wide-eyed and innocent. My daughter is 15 and she loves Jack Black and the guy from “Juno,” so I thought we could have a Mom/teenager date. I asked myself, “Vicki, is this movie making you feel good?” Myself replied, “This movie is making me angry, very sad, hopeless, and dirty-feeling.” As the onscreen obese gay man poked at the bloody intestines and told the fifth anal sex joke, I looked at my daughter, and we got up and walked out.

[SamuraiScot]

It’s good he’s honest about the incredibly high percentage of child abusers among homosexuals. But normal folks (and civilized homosexuals) don’t want homosexuals around children, not just because parents are afraid of their sons being turned queer, and therefore childless, by the experience of being abused. It’s that they don’t want to see children abducted and murdered—a nasty habit of homosexual pederasts he doesn’t mention.

[goat granny]

Homophobe is a mongrel word and meaningless. The problem with homosexuals is that they are protected and wonted get out of your face and private space...they use to say they just wanted to be left alone....they were liars from the beginning...some religious leaders said in the beginning they were after your kids and people laughed at them and called them names....well, those that gave the warning were correct...I don't give sodomy any respect, and that's not politically correct....just shut up and live your life without attacking religion or religious business's...

Most are exhibitionist as seen the such thing as their parades...beyond hope of being decent humans. Those that live their lives like everyone else and stay out of peoples faces are not the problem, its the scum of both sexes that piss off most people...

a death sentence for rapers of children will sent a bunch back into the closet (their term) not mine. It also ticks me off that the msm uses the term molested in relation to those that rape boys....call them what they are rapists...no better than those that rape female children...

[montanajoe]

I don't like the gay agenda and therefore I dont like gays pushing their agenda.

As a matter of fact I don't like a lot of folks but I do not/could care less what they think.

What I will not abide is anyone telling me what I should think< I don't care. If I don't like you I don't like you..nothing will ever change that fact..

[hosepipe]

Most all gays I know are NORMALPHOBES...

[chris37]

I’m not afraid of gays.

I don’t support their agenda, or their “unions” and their lifestyle choice is utterly repulsive to my sensibilites.

But afraid or fearful?

I think not.

[Waywardson]

No.

It is not some random “evil-utionary” occurrence.

It is called SIN.

And humans have a SOUL with a CONSCIENCE.

And thus, deep down, everyone KNOWS it is rebellion.

It.

Is.

That.

Simple.

[Joe Boucher]

In the movie Slap Shot, Paul Newman says at one point , so how are you going to react when you come home and some old queen is seducing your teen aged son??

[Chainmail]

Homosexuality is a mental disease. I feel sorry for the afflicted and I am all in favor of seeking a cure for them but absolutely no way will I allow my children to be exposed to their disease.

[elcid1970]

“....antisocial conservatives to promote further intolerance against gays is inevitable, perhaps; but if it’s any consolation, it should also have them doing a bit of navel-gazing, seeing that their hatred is just an artifact of their godlessly evolved minds.”

In that final sentence this faggie author bares his fangs & reveals his true heterophobia.

[LibLieSlayer]

YOU WILL ALL FACE GOD ONE DAY... you also had better remember what HE did to Sodom... sodomites.

LLS

[Flag_This]

"... most evolutionary research on homosexuality involves trying to locate its fringe gene-enhancing benefits."

Seems to me, from an evolutionary standpoint, that homosexuality is a dead end. How do genes get "enhanced" if they're not passed on through reproduction?

[Carborundum]

If a heterosexual man pursues/oogles/pesters a woman because he is seeking physical relationship, that is rightly called sexual harrassment and he is subject to disdain at the least, and legal action or occasionally physical punishment for that offending behavior.

If a homosexual man engages in parallel obnoxious behaviors toward a heterosexual man, seeking a physical relationship, the liberals tell us that that is just “cruising”. If the heterosexual reacts with disgust, that is now considered abnormal and “homophobic”.

Or so the liberal establishment tells us.

This, of course,is the sort of thinking that allowed Sandusky to “do his thing” for all those years.

[central_va]

Homosexual behavior is mother nature’s way of spinning off bad genes real quick. Fags are, in a way, sort of jumping out of the gene pool. This behavior was conducted “in the closet” up to now.

[Lady Lucky]

Their primary debate is about whether or not people’s aversion to homosexuality (colloquially called "homophobia," although both authors acknowledge that this is a misnomer because it is more a negative attitude towards this demographic than it is fear) is a product of natural selection or, alternatively, a culturally constructed, transmitted bias.

Under the excessive pile of words, the author is describing a nature-nurture issue.

People don't want gays around their kids. Does it matter whether this is instinctive aversion or learned aversion? Either way it's beneficial. Why? Because gays are set in a sexual mode that occurred in childhood, often due to inappropriate sexualizing behavior -- abuse -- and one's children are in that impressionable period when their sexual identity is vulnerable to derailment by inappropriate behavior. Gays are fixed in pre-adolescent years, and that's why they gravitate to children, and that's how they spread their affliction.

Like most other chicken-egg, nature-nurture issues, it's pointless to ask which factor prevails. There's no one without the other.