The struggle of same-sex activism in a LGBT world.

[MrIntrepid]

So let me get this right.
Based on that you say there's only two given sexual preferences: gay (male/male) and straight (male/female).
You say that only the phallus can cause pleasure and is needed in order to fulfill the sexual needs, and that lesbians are just deluded and should be straight?

Wouldn't Goddesses that engage in lesbian sex or that are lesbians would feel like you are disrespecting them?
Having an opinion is different than trying to convince the whole forum that only the male parts make the sex pleasurable and anything else is not normal.

You're still going to try to pick apart what I've just said.
You cannot change your sexual orientation and preference.

And you say you're gay, right? This might be the cause you say what you say, because it gives you a sense of empowerment. Women and men have their own unique roles, we can work together, bla bla, but the sexual preference is none of anyone's business.

Men have different stimulation points, so do women. It is proven that lesbian sex and gay sex have a higher rate for orgasms, and that's just because toxic masculinity is still a thing. They just lay there not taking care of each other as the act of sex supposes.

I don't mean to be pedantic but there are two things I have a problem with here:

• We don't need to bring the feelings of the Gods into this.

• Could we do away with terms like "toxic masculinity?" It would be enough to say that people are selfish in bed.

As for SWG, I think dude just had his own preferences and his opinion is fine because it's not like he's going to go out of his way to prevent other people from thinking differently.

I personally disagree with women needing a man with them to have good sex though.

[Meteor]

I won't assume since you haven't mentioned your opinion on fellatio),

I don’t mind giving or receiving, but it is not something women should be doing. It’s very denigrating especially in a hetero relationship with no way to reciprocate.

Reciprocating would be simple for other people: 69.
Of course, you should not do something you're not comfortable with. I just want to remind you that there are others have no issue with it, and that it can be a mutual thing.

Like vegans, the lesbians may delude themselves into thinking that this is healthy enough to sustain, but they know it isn’t, which is why the artificial penis and other contraptions are used. I already went over this.

This is just my experience and I don't know how much it counts as I'm not even into women (although I used to be a bit curious), but I personally lost interest in sex toys after opening up spiritually thanks to meditations from the JoS. When people are spiritually open, the amount of things you can do sexually and the pleasure that can be generated increase drastically, regardless of what sex you or your partner are. I agree that using a strap-on seems pointless and hollow, but that's far from necessary if you know what you're doing with your hands, tongue and you and your partner's chakras. You still have no idea.

For someone like you to be unconcerned with the sexual preferences of women is perfectly understandable, as it doesn't seem like that's what's really important to you when it comes to sex and relationships.

Not true! I’m willing to do whatever said partner would like but I’m not a whipping boy about it.

My apologies, I may have misunderstood then. I assumed you might be the type who sees women in a prudish way and mainly as romantic partners and someone to potentially have and raise children with, rather than someone to explore the depths of sexual pleasure with, which you'd rather seek on the side with men. That's why I assumed you would hold back sexually with a woman and that fulfilling her completely wouldn't be as important to you, but perhaps I was wrong.

have a clue what straight women like, let alone non-straight women?

What kind of smear is this? Incels and other types of guys that think women are some strange mystical creature that is impossible to figure out are empty headed idiots. I understand what women like because I have examined human nature and behavior.

You made an attempt to understand them based on what you could perceive from an outside perspective, then filled in the blanks incorrectly, like I said. That said, I agree with you that people who think women are incomprehensible are empty headed idiots. Men and women are similar enough for us to be able to relate to each other's experiences, so understanding the other is simply a matter of connecting with someone of the opposite sex and seeing that person's world; although then still, there are too many individual differences for one to know what every single man or woman is like. The point is that a lack of understanding comes not from the differences between the sexes, but from a lack of a sufficient knowledge of different perspectives.

Even now, you still lack information. You understand some women, but not all lesbians; that's why you say they're doing it wrong. You know what: some lesbians are doing it wrong, just like some straight people, some gay men, some polyamorous people, and some monogamous people are doing it wrong. Each approach to romance and sexuality comes with its own challenges, and people don't always have the knowledge to overcome or avoid those properly. But through personal growth and spirituality, all of these problems can be solved.

Based on your responses I know that I did the exact same thing regarding polyamorous people that you do regarding lesbians. Because I perceived how horribly wrong it goes a lot of the time (because those were the only cases that I looked at), I assumed that having mutiple partners is always doomed to go horribly wrong, and the ambition of greedy narcissists alone. I felt the same way about those who consistently engage in casual sex, instead of doing it only for the purpose of experimenting. However, after talking about it with FancyMancy in another thread, I recalled that a God I got along with well mentioned (if I understood Him correctly) that He regularly has sex casually. I became aware that, just because it would never work for me, I was focusing only on the negative examples because they confirmed what I already believed. Without even realising it, I had dismissed cases of casual sex and open relationships that were perfectly fine for some people. I had been blinded by my own perspective, subconsciouly focusing only on the negatives because I know such a thing could never work for me, not considering that maybe for some people out there it could work.
You may not realise it yet, but you are doing the same.

you're perfectly fine with sticking your dick in a guy's anus

The mouth is an orifice unlike the penis. I know you don’t have one but there is difference when it comes to putting your mouth on/in something vs the penis. Also if someone has healthy digestive health and cleans themselves properly (which a gay man would certainly make sure of more than the average person) there should be no fecal matter in the immediate area inside of the anus. And I would do oral that way before a vagina. Sad but true! But we’re not here to talk about my preferences.

I'm sorry for pressing the issue, and I know this has occurred before so I hope I'm not being too rude this time; but I'm really curious about the reasoning behind your perspective. The admission that you'd rather perform analingus than cunnilingus seems bizarre to me at face value, although it's not my place to judge. However, I'm wondering now where exactly the difference lies for you. You mentioned before that the issue was that a woman might've had sex with dozens of men before. In that case, would you also hate cunnilingus if the person you're doing it to is a virgin who has never been penetrated by anyone before, not even you?

[SouthernWhiteGentile]

Reciprocating would be simple for other people: 69.
Of course, you should not do something you're not comfortable with. I just want to remind you that there are others have no issue with it, and that it can be a mutual thing.

I understand that but it’s still not the same.

if you know what you're doing with your hands, tongue and you and your partner's chakras. You still have no idea.

Meteor I know that you’re a sophisticated woman but please be honest with me, how many lesbians are using their CHAKRAS to fuck?

This also goes back to the same point. You can stimulate the chakras, use the hands and mouth, it does not matter because there is NO PHALLUS.

Try to see it this way. In the case of a man there is a big difference between orgasming from self- masturbation (that’s all lesbians can do) vs a man orgasming from being penetrated anally.

There is nothing a woman can do to satisfy another woman that a man can’t, men can actually do it better obviously. That’s the summary of my thoughts.

My apologies, I may have misunderstood then. I assumed you might be the type who sees women in a prudish way and mainly as romantic partners and someone to potentially have and raise children with, rather than someone to explore the depths of sexual pleasure with, which you'd rather seek on the side with men.
That's why I assumed you would hold back sexually with a woman and that fulfilling her completely wouldn't be as important to you, but perhaps I was wrong.

I see most women in that way but I would make an exception for a special someone and you know what I would even give her oral IF that’s what she wanted. My needs do come first but what could I like that my partner wouldn’t? But I have none of this oral or caring about needs for the average tinder slut. Not a chance.

You made an attempt to understand them based on what you could perceive from an outside perspective, then filled in the blanks incorrectly, like I said.

There was no “attempt” I did and do understand.

Even now, you still lack information. You understand some women, but not all lesbians; that's why you say they're doing it wrong. You know what: some lesbians are doing it wrong, just like some straight people, some gay men, some polyamorous people, and some monogamous people are doing it wrong. Each approach to romance and sexuality comes with its own challenges, and people don't always have the knowledge to overcome or avoid those properly. But through personal growth and spirituality, all of these problems can be solved.

I agree but by being lesbian you are “doing it wrong” by default. There is no right way to do it because an FF relationship doesn’t work in the context of nature.

I'm sorry for pressing the issue, and I know this has occurred before so I hope I'm not being too rude this time; but I'm really curious about the reasoning behind your perspective.

I don’t care anymore. I’m willing to tell all and let everyone take a look inside this brain of mine, I know they want to see. It takes me like half an hour to write something like this because my mind is a formula one racetrack that never stops and is constantly flowing with ideas and thoughts and it’s hard for me to focus on one and put it into words.

The admission that you'd rather perform analingus than cunnilingus seems bizarre to me at face value, although it's not my place to judge. However, I'm wondering now where exactly the difference lies for you.

I think it’s a mental and aesthetic thing for me. I know it sounds gross but you can’t really go wrong with an anus and the buttocks in general, it will always look appetizing to me, while in terms of the female organs it varies wildly from each individual, some are very gross looking while others are more appealing.

You mentioned before that the issue was that a woman might've had sex with dozens of men before. In that case, would you also hate cunnilingus if the person you're doing it to is a virgin who has never been penetrated by anyone before, not even you?

I can’t say for sure, it still seems like a pointless thing to me when I have a phallus that works fine.

[ss_moon]

I didn't have a right term for his behaviour so I used that term. I don't believe in it tho. And as of bringing Gods into this, I'm not. I'm just saying it's best we keep fighting for our purpose rather than discuss what's up in everyone's bed.

Wishing everyone the best!

[Jack]

....

......

You don't have to be attached to an idea emotionally to have a stern position about it. Your position about polyamory, Promiscuity and casual sex weren't wrong in a general sense.

When you're talking about men and women or relationships, and not about a particular man or woman and their relationship, we must talk in Generalities and invoke statistics, facts and Data to make sense of the world.

This thing called "polyamory " which basically just means an open relationship, even though they claim they're emotionally involved with multiple people (which is not sustainable). This idea and other ideas such as "swinging " ,casual sex etc are just a result of a society that is obsessed with sex and material pursuits.

What is the purpose of a human being in relation to society ? It is to expand their energy to contribute to something greater than themselves, so that that greater idea may be sustainable. But what is the western zeitgeist ?

After the fall of Christianity in the west ,the Greco - Roman pagan values that the Christians had adopted of Community, cohesion etc disappeared. This was replaced by left wing jews for Hollywood culture, drugs, vanity and an overt obsession with individual material pleasure where you just can't stop.

Since the mind is not aware of any other way to expand, it keeps expanding in the falling well of material desires. There should be a good balance between the spheres of personal individual happiness and community welfare.

Human beings are not designed by nature to be promiscuous. Women have oxytocin releases in their brains which causes pairbonding when they have sex with a man. Sex is a very serious and important thing to a woman, which is why she must be very careful with whom she has sex with. But due to contraception, women can have sex without the responsibility (being in a relationship or getting pregnant. ) When a woman has sex with a lot of men ,typically (but not always) her oxytocin release mechanism is damaged beyond repair and she's mentally gone.

She is unable to find happiness in relationships anymore. Its the same thing with men but the only difference is that the average of people men can have sex with until they reach that point is a little higher.



Promiscuity and casual sex causes unhappiness in both men and women. This is not a hypothesis. These are facts of reality.

Women are the most sexually liberated and are having more sex with people, than any other generation of women in the entirety of history and as a result they are the most unhappiest they have ever been. Same goes for men.
https://www.nber.org/papers/w14969

This is because of the lack of values of something higher than themselves. You'll typically hear the story of a woman getting into new age woo woo stuff and if you peel back the layers,you may find that in her past she's been ran through by multiple men and is now above just physical pleasure. Shes trying to find a higher way, in the wrong place.

If you remove values, religion and community and let humans to their basic desires under a hyper materialistic society you will create a society that is addicted to pornography, drugs ,crime and everything from the lowest rungs of the gutter. A majority of both men and women are single and that divide will only keep on increasing.

This is not happening out of nowhere. There is a carefully plotted scheme being executed to destroy men,women, children and sexuality because they intend humans to be patented creatures grown in tubes in the future. They recently announced this, you can Google it. They are trying to market it as a feminist liberation that women don't have to go through pregnancy and can work that time instead.

It's the siege of Babylon. This has happened multiple times in history with the fall of multiple empires. The current Anglo American empire is at the breaking point and at the end of its path. The more serious and pressing concerns are the future of the white race due to the invasion of Europe and America and the inability of the whites to produce enough children to rival the non whites already inside their walls. By 2050 the majority of both Europe and America will be composed of non whites. If something very drastic and serious isn't done in between that time, then there are going to be very serious consequences.

Couple this with the vaccines and the mad scientists trying to sterilize people, and you have an extremely serious problem.

If something must happen, it must happen very quickly in a couple of years and very drastically if you want to be able to fight with the non whites. Because once the population of non whites is above 40% ,its Game over.

[Meteor]

if you know what you're doing with your hands, tongue and you and your partner's chakras. You still have no idea.

Meteor I know that you’re a sophisticated woman but please be honest with me, how many lesbians are using their CHAKRAS to fuck?

You have a point there regarding those who are without. Even so, if others are happy using toys or whatever, that's up to them.

Try to see it this way. In the case of a man there is a big difference between orgasming from self- masturbation (that’s all lesbians can do) vs a man orgasming from being penetrated anally.

Isn't there also a difference for guys between jerking yourself off and being jerked off by someone else? Touching yourself or being touched by someone else feel very different, regardless of whether you're a man or a woman. This is an example of what I meant when I said that you made some incorrect assumptions while filling in the blanks; it would've been unlikely for you to know that.

There is nothing a woman can do to satisfy another woman that a man can’t, men can actually do it better obviously. That’s the summary of my thoughts.

Considering my preferences, I think I'm not qualified to refute this. I personally appreciate the straightforwardness of a phallus × yoni combination in sex, even when it comes to astral sex. I'm sure an actual lesbian would be able to explain her preferences better than I can with mere speculation, although I get a feeling they might not want to talk to someone who rejects their sexual preferences.

Either way, thank you for explaining your thoughts in such detail. I enjoyed the discussion despite disagreeing with you.

My apologies, I may have misunderstood then. I assumed you might be the type who sees women in a prudish way and mainly as romantic partners and someone to potentially have and raise children with, rather than someone to explore the depths of sexual pleasure with, which you'd rather seek on the side with men.
That's why I assumed you would hold back sexually with a woman and that fulfilling her completely wouldn't be as important to you, but perhaps I was wrong.

I see most women in that way but I would make an exception for a special someone and you know what I would even give her oral IF that’s what she wanted. My needs do come first but what could I like that my partner wouldn’t? But I have none of this oral or caring about needs for the average tinder slut. Not a chance.

So I only half-misunderstood then. I never even considered casual sex, but I think your thoughts on oral sex make a lot more sense in that context.

You made an attempt to understand them based on what you could perceive from an outside perspective, then filled in the blanks incorrectly, like I said.

There was no “attempt” I did and do understand.

Same; that's why we're debating it.

I agree but by being lesbian you are “doing it wrong” by default. There is no right way to do it because an FF relationship doesn’t work in the context of nature.

I mean, there's bonobos... But they seem to use it more as a way to bond socially and gain power and control over males as a collective, rather than being exclusively homosexual or even remotely monogamous. I've heard of cases of homosexuality in birds as well and they're often monogamous, but I don't think that counts since most male birds don't have a phallus in the first place, and species that consistently engage in FF pairings do so to raise their children together after the father of their children leaves them, which doesn't really sound like a sexual thing.

But to be honest, I'm unsure what it even means for a homosexual relationship to work in the context of nature to begin with anyway. The purpose of sex and relationships is usually having and raising offspring, pleasure, and bonding because groups are usually stronger than individuals. Putting that into the context of human sexual dimorphism (men having more libido and being stronger and more suited for combat than women on average) would suggest that homosexuality would occur in males when they are segregated from women and in a context where they need to apply their physical strength, while homosexuality would happen in females as a defence mechanism against (potential) abuse from malicious and dominant men.

While the above logic matches some of my observations, it contradicts with the knowledge that sexual preferences also often seem to emerge during early teenage years in a seemingly natural way, often with signs even as a pre-teen if you don't mind looking at stereotypes. This suggests that at least for some people, homosexuality is a natural tendency rather than a reaction or adaptation to any situation in particular. My brother told me that when he was 13 years old, a classmate of his came out as a lesbian, and no one was surprised because she always behaved like one of the boys anyway. Hearing that made me think that for some humans it really is just a natural thing, regardless of whether or not others understand it.

I'm sorry for pressing the issue, and I know this has occurred before so I hope I'm not being too rude this time; but I'm really curious about the reasoning behind your perspective.

I don’t care anymore. I’m willing to tell all and let everyone take a look inside this brain of mine, I know they want to see. It takes me like half an hour to write something like this because my mind is a formula one racetrack that never stops and is constantly flowing with ideas and thoughts and it’s hard for me to focus on one and put it into words.

I hope that explaining these things to others also helps you sort out your own thoughts to an extent.

The admission that you'd rather perform analingus than cunnilingus seems bizarre to me at face value, although it's not my place to judge. However, I'm wondering now where exactly the difference lies for you.

I think it’s a mental and aesthetic thing for me. I know it sounds gross but you can’t really go wrong with an anus and the buttocks in general, it will always look appetizing to me, while in terms of the female organs it varies wildly from each individual, some are very gross looking while others are more appealing.

You mentioned before that the issue was that a woman might've had sex with dozens of men before. In that case, would you also hate cunnilingus if the person you're doing it to is a virgin who has never been penetrated by anyone before, not even you?

I can’t say for sure, it still seems like a pointless thing to me when I have a phallus that works fine.

Fair enough, and thank you for answering my questions. I think I understand your perspective a bit better now.

[SouthernWhiteGentile]

Isn't there also a difference for guys between jerking yourself off and being jerked off by someone else? Touching yourself or being touched by someone else feel very different, regardless of whether you're a man or a woman. This is an example of what I meant when I said that you made some incorrect assumptions while filling in the blanks; it would've been unlikely for you to know that.

The act itself is no different with someone else, intimacy is the only thing added which gives the illusion that it’s somehow a new experience. Ultimately WHO CARES? I can jerk myself off. Why the fuck would I need someone else to do it?

I get a feeling they might not want to talk to someone who rejects their sexual preferences.

Not surprising. Most people with beliefs and lifestyles that don’t make sense can’t engage in discussion because their tower of delusion will come crashing down.

Putting that into the context of human sexual dimorphism (men having more libido and being stronger and more suited for combat than women on average) would suggest that homosexuality would occur in males when they are segregated from women and in a context where they need to apply their physical strength,

Not wrong because in a gender segregated environment like prison or even the military previously hetero men may choose to have homoerotic experiences because it is the only thing available. I’m not sure why else it would manifest. I just accept it for what it is.

while homosexuality would happen in females as a defence mechanism against (potential) abuse from malicious and dominant men.

I’m not the psychological expert but it seems that the best defense from abuse by a dominant man would be another man ready to dominate that male. This doesn’t apply as much in the modern day. Women can have a firearm, mace or other weapons that equalize conflict making male physical strength and power irrelevant.

[Meteor]

The act itself is no different with someone else, intimacy is the only thing added which gives the illusion that it’s somehow a new experience. Ultimately WHO CARES? I can jerk myself off. Why the fuck would I need someone else to do it?

Haha, if you say so. I'll admit I used to think the same until I actually met someone I really love.

I get a feeling they might not want to talk to someone who rejects their sexual preferences.

Not surprising. Most people with beliefs and lifestyles that don’t make sense can’t engage in discussion because their tower of delusion will come crashing down.

Either that, or they're tired of being criticised for no reason. There's also gay men who avoid anti-gay xians, because they're just so tired of responding to them, even though you believe male homosexuality isn't delusional. There could be some lesbians like that too.

Not wrong because in a gender segregated environment like prison or even the military previously hetero men may choose to have homoerotic experiences because it is the only thing available. I’m not sure why else it would manifest. I just accept it for what it is.

Why else would it manifest? If you're talking about homosexuality manifesting without segregation, it seems like it can also be a natural tendency for some people regardless of the circumstances. As for it manifesting in such a context, I think it's not just because it's the only thing available, but also because bonding with other strong men can be beneficial in a stressful or dangerous situation such as being in prison or the military.

while homosexuality would happen in females as a defence mechanism against (potential) abuse from malicious and dominant men.

I’m not the psychological expert but it seems that the best defense from abuse by a dominant man would be another man ready to dominate that male. This doesn’t apply as much in the modern day. Women can have a firearm, mace or other weapons that equalize conflict making male physical strength and power irrelevant.

You're not wrong, but women who are afraid of men (for example due to trauma) wouldn't be able to see it that way. I also had a phase where I was afraid of men, but I grew out of it, as I realised that not all men are scary, and that what I really wanted was a male partner who is strong but also kind and gentle. During that time I considered myself bisexual, as I was interested in women and men who looked feminine enough not to scare me, although it turned out I actually wasn't very compatible with either group of people. But I think that's because of me, and that there could be other women out there who would be more compatible with each other, who might thus prefer being exclusively homosexual if they have an issue with men.

However, I've also met a lesbian before who had several male friends and just wasn't interested in them sexually. I really think that for some people it's just natural, rather than being caused by any mental problems like it was for me.