This is topic Consensual Incest... in forum Blackout's Box Hall of Fame at Blackout Bulletin Boards on BLACKOUT.COM.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.blackout.com/blackout/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=21;t=000024

Posted by pharris (Member # 211) on :
 
Not that im condoning - just reporting....

- Pharris

INCEST: THE LAST TABOO
by Philip Nobile (as originally published in Penthouse, December 1977 issue)
'Previously suppressed material from
the original Kinsey interviews tells us that incest is
prevalent and often positive. '

Few things are as powerful as a deviation whose time has come. Homosexuality, wife swapping, open marriage, bisexuality, S & M, and kiddie porn have already had their seasons. Just as we seemed to be running low on marketable taboos, the unspeakable predictably popped up. Incest is supposed to be the ultimate inhibition, universally recognized and unconsciously observed. Margaret Mead declares that widespread breaches of this primative taboo may be more disruptive of society than crime, suicide, and murder. So incest is very serious business. Even the discontentedly civilized shudder at its mention. Yet the game that every family can play, while repulsive and resistable, appears undeniably bewitching and oddly exciting in passing fantasy.

Thematically, incest is rugged country. Although Sophocles, Shakespeare, Stendahl, Shelly, Balzac, Wagner, Mann, and Wharton have tried to express its horrible fascination, the popular literature is understandably thin. But no longer. This once unbankable subject is now the darling of the media. After centuries of restraint, incest is finally a hit.

To wit: NBC News devoted its monthly Saturday night Weekend show last May to a ninety-minute documentary on the incest victims at a unique California child sex-abuse clinic.

In Pete Hamill's boxing novel Flesh and Blood (Random House), young Brooklyn heavyweight Bobby Fallon sleeps with his mother Kate and fights for the title. According to the catologue copy, theirs is "a love affair that readers will never forget."

Carolyn Slaughter's Relations (Mason/Charter), an August Literary Guild alternate, tells of the intimacies shared by a brother and sister in the late nineteenth century. "The beauty of their love is inevitably destroyed, but not the memory of the beauty. ..."

Twins (Putnam's) by Bari Wood and Jack Geasland, is a recently published novel based on the weird deaths of indentical-twin gynecologists in New York City in 1975. Their fictionalized fatal flaw was incest. Paperback rights have been sold to NAL for $902,000, and the movie version is about to be optioned.

Rewedded Bliss: Love, Alimony, Incest, Ex-Spouses, and Other Domestic Blessings (Basic), by David Mayleas, cites cases of sex between stepparents and stepchildren and gives rules for avoiding this increasing "polyincest" in second marriages.

For her untitled book on incest (contracted by Hawthorn), children's book author Louise Armstrong is tracking down women for first-person accounts of the ordeal.

Redbook, Family Circle, People, the Washington Star, and the New York Times have recently broken the taboo in print with major features.

Three films with incest plots were exhibited at Cannes last spring: Yves Boisset's The Yellow Taxi, with Fred Astaire and Charlotte Rampling; Carlos Saura's Elisa, Vida Mia, with Geraldine Chaplin and Fernando Rey; and benoit Jackquot's Les Enfants du Placard, with Brigette Fossey and Jean sorel. This cluster arrives six years after Louis Malle's sympathetic treatment of an incestous mother and son in Murmur of the Heart.

Incest would be just another media trend, faddishly seduced and abandoned after repealed use, were it not for two forthcoming studies that promise to turn the prohibition on its head. Both introduce and uphold the notion of "positive incest", an especially dissonant oxymoron that will madden therapists and confuse the masses more than the Kinsey reports did twenty-five years ago. Actually, Kinsey was the first sex researcher to uncover evidence that violation of the taboo does not necessarily shake heaven and earth. Unpublished data taken from his original sex histories (some 18,000 in number) imply that lying with a near relative rarely ends in tragedy. "In our basic sample, the is, our random sample, only a tiny percentage of our incest cases had been reported to police or psychologists," states Kinsey collaborator Dr. Paul Gebhard, currently directory of the Institute for Sex Research in Bloomington, Ind. "In fact, in the ones that were not reported, I'm having a hard time recalling any traumatic effects at all. I certainly can't recall any form among the brother-sister participants, and I can't put my finger on any among the parent-child participants."

The nation was hardly prepared for such talk in the fifties, but Gebhard is relasing Kinsey's startling incest material for incorporation in Warran Farrell's work-in-progress, The Last Taboo: The Three Faces of Incest. According to the cultural gatekeepers in New York publishing, America still wasn't ready to hear about positive incest in the mid seventies. Farrell's impressive credentials -- a Ph.D. in political science from N.Y.U., former board member of the National Organization for Women, and author of a book entitled Beyond Masculinity -- counted as nothing. His forty-one-page outline (including two sizzling case histories -- one with a New York writer who has intercourse regularly with his seventeen-year-old daughter, occasionally supplemented with threesomes with the daughter's girlfriend, and another with a Notre Dame graduate who made love to his mother for ten years) was returned by twenty-two houses last fall. MacGraw-Hill's editor-in-chief Fred Hills wanted to acquire the project, but company executives said no. The top editors at a major reprint concern were anxious to buy it until their lady boss invoked an "over my dead body" line. Bantam was the only firm that dared to bid, and Farrall signed for $60,000.

'Dr. James Ramey, a sociologist, states, "If two relatives
make love in a caring situation, that's one thing. If it's rape, it's another.
You can't put the incest tag on that." '

Dr. James Ramey, a sociologist with a multi-disciplinary Ph.D. from Columbia, has censored his own positive incest manuscript for the past four years. Fearing for his reputation and massive misunderstanding, Ramey hesitated to lead with an apparently permission-giving book on man's oldest taboo. He refuses to discuss specifics but volunteers that only one incest family from his 1,500-plus interviews and questionnaires ever ran afoul of the law. "And that was a setup," he adds. Feeling that others are bound to soften up the opposition before him, Ramey has opened negotiations for the book. But unless he can control the publication date, promotion, and jacket and advertising copy, he will not proceed. "You have to be careful when you do a taboo-bucking book," he comments. "There are a lot of slips between the cup and the lip."

NBC's Weekend visit to the Santa Clara County Child Sexual Abuse Treatment Center in San Jose will not help Farrell and Ramey convince anybody that incest is less than a scourge. Host Lloyd Dobyns was so depressed by the content that he told the audience in his introduction that he wasn't sure he'd watch himself it it weren't his own program. What followed was a montage of contrite fathers and exploited daughters pouring out their unrelievedly sad stories of incestuous grief. To interrupt the monotony of the documentary, producer Clare Crawford-Mason frequently cut to Hank Giaretto, director of the treatment center, for background and wisdom on the taboo. Giaretto was positively against incest and linked it to prostitution, drug abuse and sexual dysfunction in daughter victims. In his experience the normally repressed impulse overpowered law-abiding, middle-class fathers when they were down and out professionally and alienated from their wives. These men looked toward their blossoming daughters first for consolation and then for sex. A self-described humanist psychologist, Giaretto requires every father patient to apologize to his daughter and confess his secret to every family member still in the dark about his sins. Regardless of the cost and embarrassment, he believes that public prostration is preferable to discreet, private handling of incestuous entanglements.

For example, in a curious composite portrait of an incestuous family drawn from Giaretto's records and published in Family Circle, the father goes to prison for six months, depletes his life savings, and loses his old job; his daughter has to repeat a year in school; and the other two children freak out and are forced into therapy. Branded as a child molester, the father has dim prospects of future employment. Although such a cure may be worse than the disease, Giaretto admits he would hand over to the law any participants in incest who sought his counsel anynymously. "I have never come across a happy incestuous family, " he said on Weekend. Of this there is little doubt.

Although Farrell had personally familiarized Giaretto with his findings on positive incest before the Weekend taping, Giaretto failed to temper his apocalyptism on camera. For instance, Giaretto might have hinted that his strictly patient population was biased by definition and therefore could not possibly provide a true picture of the practice. And he could have explained that brother-sister incest, by far the most common kind, is known to be relatively harmless. Producer Crawford-Mason, who is also a Washington correspondent for People, loaded the documentary with so many recitals of the Auschwitz of incest that key, clarifying questions were never asked. Both Crawford-Mason and Dobyns deny sensationalizing a sensitive sexual issue before a wide-eyed- audience of millions, emphasizing that the show was about Giaretto's center, not incest. "If the subject was incest," Dobyns conceded, "we did it poorly."

Crawford-Mason won't grant the bias inherent in Giaretto's sample. "You're trying to attack my story," she says testily. "How many documentaries have you produced? ... If we didn't make it clear that brother-sister incest was not as traumatizing it was a mistake. We discussed incest for the first time in public. And the very fact that you're writing this article proves that the show succeeded. You have a right to comment, but it's Monday-morning quarterbacking."

Warren Farrell admires Giaretto's rehabilitative mission among legitimate victims, for his own investigation allows for considerable negativity, particularly in the father-daughter category. But he faults Weekend for its skewed perspective. "It was like interviewing Cuban refugees about Cuba. Weekend recorded sexually abused children speaking about their sexual abuse, which is valuable, but the inference is that all incest is abuse. And that's not true."

Farrell was reluctant to give a tour of the heart of the country. His research is incomplete, and the data collected from 200 in-depth interviews (he plans to have 250 for the book) await a computer run. Although he vowed not to speak out prior to publication (probably in 1979), he consented to a one-time debriefing at a Chinese restaurant near his Riverside Drive apartment overlooking the Hudson River in Manhattan. At thirty-four, he is separated from his wife, who is an IBM executive, and childless.

The idea for the book struck him after reading a Times article about incest early last year. According to the piece, only a tiny fraction of the cases ever reaches the courts. In 1976 New York City police received merely one incest complaint and no arrests. Farrell wondered if perhaps some incidents weren't reported because the relationships went smoothly. Since nothing had been written about nonpatient-nonoffender participants, he decided the gap was too large to ignore.

What is the incidence? Farrell's survey of 2,000 undergraduates in state as well as community colleges yielded a 4 to 5 percent figure. Kinsey's incidence was 3.9, but his collaborator, Dr. Wardell Pomeroy, thinks that the real figure is closer to 10 percent. Incest is not simply a deviation; it is a crime. People tend not to respond as honestly as they would about other modes of unconventional sex. Positive incest is even more hidden, since nothing is gained by disclusure. Thus most of Farrell's positive participants who replied to his ads in the Village Voice, the New York Review of Books, Psychology Today, and the New Republic were speaking out for the first time.

Farrell cautions that his statistics are rough and confined just to his current sample of 200 -- including people from the unemployed, the working class, business executives, Ph.D.'s and professional athletes. But his preliminary data suggest that the taboo needs severe overhauling. Breaking down the effects into positive (beneficial), negative (traumatic), and mixed (nontraumatic but not regarded as beneficial) categories -- the three faces of incest in his subtitle -- he says that the ovewhelming majority of cases fall into the positive column. Cousin-cousin (including uncle-niece and aunt-nephew) and brother-sister (including sibling homosexuality) relations, accounting for about half of the total incidence, are perceived as beneficial in 95 percent of the cases.

Mother-son incest represents 10 percent of the incidence and is 70 percent positive, 20 percent mixed, and 10 percent negative for the son. For the mother it is mostly positive. Farrell points out the boys don't seem to suffer, not even from the negaive experience. "Girls are much more influenced by the dictates of society and are more willing to take on sexual guilt."

The father-daughter scene, ineluctably complicated by feelings of dominance and control, is not nearly so sanguine. Despite some advertisments, calling explicitly for positive female experiences, Farrell discovered that 85 percent of the daughters admitted to having negative attitudes toward their incest. Only 15 percent felt positive about the experience. On the other hand, statistics from the vantage of the fathers involved were almost the reverse -- 60 percent positive, 20 percent negative. "Either men see these relationships differently," comments Farrell, "or I am getting selective reporting from women."

'Do you talk about rape and courtship in the same breath?
Both are defined by intercourse, but the consent and spirit are different. So, too, with so-called coercive and noncoercive incest.'

In a typical traumatic case, an authoritarian father, unhappily married in a sexually repressed houshold and probably unemployed, drunkenly imposes himself on his young daughter. Genital petting may have started as early as age eight with first intercourse occurring around twelve. Since the father otherwise extends very little attention to his daughter, his sexual advances may be one of the few pleasant experiences she has with him. If she is unaware of society's taboo and if the mother does not intervene, she has no reason to suspect the enormity of the aberration. But when she grows up and learns of the taboo, she feels cheapened. If she comes from the lower class, she may turn to prostitution or drugs as compensation for self-worthlessness, although a direct cause-effect link is far from certain. The trauma is spread through all classes, Farrell observes, but incest is more likely to be negative in the lower class.

Ramey would quarrel with Farrell's classification of the above case as incest. When coercion is involved, it's plain rape in his opinion. "You can't put the incest tag on that," he argues. "If two relatives make love in a caring situation, that's one thing. If it's rape, it's another." Dr. C.A. Tripp, a New York sex researecher who is unafraid of positive incest, also contests Farrell's methodology. "Do you talk about rape and courtship in the same breath?" he says. "Both are defined by intercourse, but the consent and spririt are vastly different. So, too, with so-called coercive and noncoercive incest. The two shouldn't be lumped together as two aspects of the same phenomenon."

It is not difficult to guess the benefits that accrue to the incestuous father, but what's in it for the 15 percent of daughters who inform Farrell that they liked it? The answer is a tender, nonfumbling, and loving introduction to sex that is wildly arounsing for all its wickedness and devoid of the usual teenage backseat trial and error. One daughter told Farrell that she preferred her father to "the locker room jerkoffs" who were interested only in scoring with her. She felt that they, rather that her father, were trying to take advantage. If the father lets his daughter go gently, avoiding jealous fits, their relationship may be fondly remembered. Some have been known to continue after marriage.

"When I get my most glowing positive cases, 6 out of 200," says Farrell, "the incest is part of the family's open, sensual style of life, wherein sex is an outgrowth of warmth and affection. It is more likely that the father has good sex with his wife, and his wife is likely to know and approve -- and in one or two cases to join in."

Incredible? Impossible? Insane? Well, just such a father-daughter case happened in New York City. A forty-two-year-old Jewish writer, contentedly married for twenty years, phoned Farrell after reading his ad and related the following story.

Two years ago the writer happened to be at his beach house alone with his attractive fifteen-year-old daughter. He watched her strip out of her bikini -- nudity was not unusual in the family -- and fantasized about having sex with her while she showered. His wife's appendix operation had curtailed his sex for the previous five months. This day the women on the beach and a few beers had led him into special temptation. When the daughter emerged from the bathroom in a towel, he greeted her in the nude and erect. Although he had never consciously desired incest before, he told his daughter that he missed sex. Without further prompting she fellated him to orgasm. Then she cried until he assured her that they hadn't done anything wrong; he asked her not to tell her mother.

Two weeks later the daughter walked around the house naked until the father approached her. That day he deflowered her to their mutual satisfaction. But the father was careful not to push things. He did not want to hurt his daughter, who seemed to have an active sex life with boys her own age. Several weeks later the daughter took the initiative again, this time with a girl friend as a third party. This threesome was the most exciting sex the father had ever had. Soon the father and daughter were having intercourse three times a week, repairing to motels with their secret passion. When they were six months into the incest, the wife unexpectedly returned to the apartment from shopping and caught the pair in the act. Despite some initial hysteria, the wife okayed everything. Apparently she was relieved that her husband's strong sexual demands could be met at home rather than with hookers, and she hinted that she'd like to watch the two of them in bed. When the writer talked with Farrell, the incest had been ongoing for two years. The father is enjoying himself immensely, and he says that his daughter prefers his expertise to the groping of her boyfriends, who just want to be "deepthroated." The writer insists that they're both much better friends now that before.

Incredible. Impossible. Insane. But unless the writer is deluded, it is perhaps true and definitely positive. However, Farrell has become increasingly skeptical of reports from fathers, for they are seldom confirmed by daughters. For a woman's view of positive incest, see Edith Wharton's long supressed short-story fragment Beatrice Palmato, appended to R.W.B. Lewis's biography. It is the best read with one's feet in holy water, as Wharton leaves nothing to the pornographic imagination.

Brother-sister relations are attended by fewer complications, since domination is not a factor. Farrell recounted the history of a twenty-five-year-old woman who had happily slept with her older brother for two years until he left home, four years ago, to get married. Today they talk on the phone every week and remain very close. The woman has no regrets and regards her incest as one of the best sexual experiences of her life.

She began the long seduction of her brother at the age of thirteen or fourteen, prancing around their suburban New York home with her robe open. The tease progressed to leaving her bedroom door open while she was undressed. Apparently, the brother ignored these early invitations but later reciprocated with exhibitionism of his own. When she was eighteen, the girl started masturbating in bed, naked and with the door ajar. The brother responded by simltaneously masturbating in his own room. Soon they were masturbating together and performing oral sex. In a few weeks they engaged in sexual intercourse for the first time.

The sister was turned on to making love with a mirror image of herself. Breaking the taboo only heightened her pleasure. They had sex twice a week for the duration of their liason, often dipping into fantasies and Polaroid pornography. The brother once watched her make love to another man; another time he looked on as she exercised in the nude with a girl friend. On both occasions he made love to her immediately afterward. Their familial arguments ceased during the affair, and they became the best of friends. The sister now feels the incest helped in overcoming her inhibitions, though she and her brother had an active sex life with other partners while they were involved. They have slept together only once since her brother married.

Farrell realizes the risks that attend publication of this book. "In a society where men are powerful and exploitive and insensitive to women's feelings, which is reinforced by female adaptiveness and a daughter's lack of power, data like these can be used as an excuse for the continuation and magnification of that exploitation. When I consider that, I almost don't want to write the book."

Since neither victim nor benefactor needs Farrell's confirmation, why does he gamble with bringing on a sexual deluge? "First, because millions of people who are now refraining from touching, holding, and genitally caressing their children, when that is really part of a caring, loving expression, are repressing the sexuality of a lot of children and themselves. Maybe this needs repressing, and maybe it doesn't. My book should at least begin the exploration.

"Second, I'm finding that thousands of people in therapy for incest are being told, in essence, that their lives have been ruined by incest. In fact, their lives have not generally been affected as much by the incest as by the overall atmosphere. My book should help therapists put incest in perspective."

Farrell also hopes to change public attitudes so that participants in incest will no longer be automatically perceived as vitims. "The average incest participant can't evaluate his or her experience for what it was. As soon as society gets into the picture, they have to tell themselves it was bad. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy."

If pushed to the wall, would Farrell urge incest on families? "Incest is like a magnifying glass," he summarizes. "In some circumnstances it magnifies the beauty of a relationship, and in others it magnifies the trauma. I'm not recommending incest between parent and child, and especially not between father and daughter. The great majority of fathers can grasp the dynamics of positive incest 'intellectually'. But in a society that encourages looking at women in almost purely sexual terms, I don't believe they can translate this understanding into practice."

The joys of incest will be lost on the therapeutic community. A pocket of Kinseyans, however, won't dispute the possibility a priori, as most other psychotherapists, in particular the Oedipally oriented, must. "Incest was grist for our mill," comments Dr. Pomeroy, now a marriage therapist in San Francisco. "We were interested in what people did and couldn't have given a damn about what was right or wrong or proper or improper." Yet it took Pomeroy a quarter of a century to come out of the research closet. His article in last November's Penthouse Forum -- Incest: A New Look -- landed like an unopened parachute in professional sex circles, but it was the first in this new antitaboo wave.

Although Pomeroy reports many beautiful romances between father and daughter, he discriminates between the consenting adult variety and pedophilia. "The trouble with incest isn't incest at all," he remarks; "it's pedophilia. There are real problems with a thirty-five-year-old father having sex with his thirteen- or foureen-year-old daughter because of his one-up position. But a twenty-five-year-old woman sleeping with her fifty-year-old father -- what the hell difference does it make? It's not a society's concern." (Dr. Ramey came across a son who crawled into his mother's bed for the first time when he was past fifty.)

' "Maybe this [ incest ] needs repressing, and maybe it doesn't,"
says author Warren Farrell.
"My book should at least begin the exploration." '

Despite the drawbacks of pedophilic incest, Pomeroy has seen it flourish under ideal conditions. "Here's a husband who's fairly mature and thinks of incest only as a stepping-stone for his daughter in developing her sex life. So her urges her to have social-sexual contacts outside the home. I've seen cases like this but they are the great exception. The odds are against it, because the father can seldom be objective. I'm treating a man now who's had intercourse with his fourteen-year-old daughter. When he ... tried to control her outside sex, she blew the whistle."

Pomeroy speculates that incest occurs most frequently at the two extremes of society, since rich and poor tend to be less affected by sexual taboos. He eschews elaborate interpretations of the impulse that drives mothers and fathers and sisters and brothers into bed with each other. "Sex is fun," he explains. "That's the overriding factor. You can't overlook that sex is pleasurable enough to overrule this terrific taboo in some cases."

This reporter retorted that he, too, endorsed the fun of sex but wouldn't dream of incest with any of his three daughters. "Perhaps you wouldn't because you've been fathering too much -- wiping their noses, changing their diapers, and so forth," Pomery replied. "The fathering principle kills the sex impulse. It certainly does for me. I wouldn't consider sleeping with my daughter, although I've given it much thought and even talked to her about it. And she said to me, 'You're a great father, but you don't turn me on either.'"

According to Dr. Tripp, the lifting of the taboo would not automatically invite an avalanche of incestuous activity. Far from being a potential hotbed of sexual tension, the nuclear family just about kills lasciviousness around the hearth -- and for good reason. "It's not the fathering and the intimacy," states Tripp, "but the closeness and the lack of mystique that block out sexual interest between any two people, i.e., father and daughter, friend and friend, and comfortable 'old shoe' husband and wife. The most fascinating thing in sexual motivation is the appeal of a slightly hidden or removed object. What seems to permit incest to emerge at all is the insertion of some kind of alienation into the scene, e.g., the father is distant, often away from home, or the home itself is split, etc."

Willard Gaylin, a psychiatrist at Columbia Medical School as well as president of the Institute for Biology, Ethics, and the Life Sciences, is appalled by the positive incest hypothesis. For him it is an intellectual and moral contradiction. He wouldn't believe it if it lay down on his couch. "I'd have to say that what's wrong with incest is the same as what's wrong with homosexuality. It's not necessarily wrong for the persons to do it if it gives them pleasure. But it implies that some wrong has already occurred -- the there was not a normal development out of the incestual stage into finding men other than the father attractive. Incest usually represents a very distorted structure and is never a positive good. ... After all, a child will have plenty of intercourse in life, but he or she is going to have only one crack at a caring parent."

Despite Kinsey's statistics, Gaylin remains unconvinced of nontraumatic incest. "We deal in probabilities, not possibilities, in medicine. If incest became a fun-loving way of initiating your kids into sex, it would do more harm than good. I tend to trust the wisdom of the Old and New Testaments and every other religious group."

Dr. Abraham Kardiner, one of psychiatry's grand old men who did early studies on the taboo, worries about this article. "You will throw a monkey wrench into society by introducing the idea that incest is beautiful," he says. "The family is in enough trouble already from homosexuality."
 
Posted by Shostie (Member # 112) on :
 
I don't know what it was. I saw "consensual incest" and Pharris and I just HAD to click on the topic. Too bad it was just an article though.

Incest, consentual or no, is bad for the gene pool.
 
Posted by elf (Member # 276) on :
 
Interesting that Anais Nin's House of Incest was not mentioned. (she had an adult affair with her father that was consensual and described as very pleasurable). This topic fascinates me - although I am wondering what is the reason for Pharris bringing this up. Is it the anti-homosexual comments?
 
Posted by KDK PRANK CALLS (Member # 56) on :
 
Or did a family member like touching you in all the bad places?
 
Posted by pharris (Member # 211) on :
 
Elf, Im just passing the information along - it connects to the post on one of the other threads about homosexuality and public acceptance, etc.
 
Posted by susanpalooza (Member # 348) on :
 
Well, I got throught about half of it. Couldn't you have paraphrased it for us?

I don't know what to say, but I am left with a bad taste in my mouth. I happen to disagree with the idea that concensual incest is ever consensual. Even if it is brother/sister, there is still an older sibling, an authority figure, so to speak. Even if they are twins, there is still a dominant and a submissive twin. So, there is the pressure to accept what the other person is doing, or what the other person is saying because of their authority("Mother/Father/Sister/Brother says I should be enjoying this so this should be pleasurable.)

And, lots of spelling errors. I don't know why that bothers me as much as it does, but I think if a person doesn't take the time to spell things correctly, they probably didn't take the time to gather facts the correct way either.

And of course I have to take offense at the fact that they put homosexuality in the same category as incest. Even "consensual incest". And frankly I get really tired of explaining why. If it is such an issue with you to brand gays as deviants and wrong-doers, and to bring it up every time you post, then your problem with homosexuality isn't actually a comment on our culture, but a comment on the problem that lies within you (deep within you) all kidding aside.
 
Posted by pharris (Member # 211) on :
 
Suzie, I didnt write the article, I just posted it...

As for the homosexuality connecton, I feel you are wrong. The point is, it is exactly the same as consensual incest. Something that MOST people find offputting, but others participate in -

The fact remains that consensual incest, between two people over the age of 18 SOULD be, ideally, just as accepted as homosexuality. They just dont have as good a PR department.
 
Posted by pharris (Member # 211) on :
 
"Incest, consentual or no, is bad for the gene pool."

Shostie, just like homosexuality, consensual incest is (ideally) a non-reproductive lifestyle.

One would assume that a responsible incest participant would make sure that conception wasnt an issue, and then its just about love/sex, just like a homosexual relationship...
 
Posted by KDK PRANK CALLS (Member # 56) on :
 
Pharris, you really need to stop hating yourself so much and just come out of the fucking closet. You will never be happy until you do. It is becoming increasingly clear and obvious to everyone here that you have major major issues with your own surpressed gayness. Deny being gay until the cows (no pun intended) come home, but you are a fag through and through. Gayer than me even because I don't believe that you are even attracted to women at all. You have been trained and conditioned to believe that you should be. But you're not.
 
Posted by KDK PRANK CALLS (Member # 56) on :
 
Pharris and Bam Bam Bigelow. Separated at birth?
 -
 
Posted by pharris (Member # 211) on :
 
Oh, KDK, if only that were true...

And as much as I believe homosexuality to be wrong, you know i think youre a cool guy, right?

That being said, this is just another example of homosexual propaganda - anyone who makes anti-gay statements MUST be gay - theyre just in denial!

I hate to tell you this, but I have had offers - and I have no interest in some dudes nuts or sweaty ass. Just isnt my style.
 
Posted by KDK PRANK CALLS (Member # 56) on :
 
Are nuts and ass any more unsightly than the alien face-hugger between a woman's legs? I must admit that tits are hot, tho.
 
Posted by elf (Member # 276) on :
 
Agreed KDK (about tits, that is).

quote:
The fact remains that consensual incest, between two people over the age of 18 SOULD be, ideally, just as accepted as homosexuality. They just dont have as good a PR department.

As much as I would hate to admit this - I would have to agree with Pharris on this one. ***DISCLAIMER: I AM NOT CONDONING INCEST NOR MAKING ANY PERSONAL REFERENCE/ENDORSEMENT/PREFERENCE**** Although you know that I highly disagree with your views on homosexuality, Pharris - the incest thing...well, as crazy as the dynamics are to us incestaphobes, there is an argument for it. However, like the article mentions - there is a tremendous difference between adult consensual incest and pedophilia.

I can't believe I am about to post this.

[Insomnia]
 
Posted by susanpalooza (Member # 348) on :
 
The thing is, I was very religious for most of my life, but I never could figure out why anyone would feel justified in saying that anyone else is going to hell. Christians put Jews in hell, Jews put Christians in hell, Christians put other Christians in hell, Jews put other Jews in hell, and on and on it goes. On a side note, I miss the days when you actually had to go outside or turn on a religious program to be told you're going to hell.

sigh

Anyway, I just don't think your view of the world is very clear, things really are just not as cut and dry as you think they are.

I suppose that there might be such a thing as consensual incest now that I really think about it, but I have a hard time believing it, like I said before, with the problem of someone having some authority over the other person, it is very one-sided.

The thing is, there are underlying reasons why something was named right or wrong. Adam and Eve's children were allowed to have sex. Why? At that point they could and their children wouldn't be born damaged.

All I'm saying is this, just because something is illegal doesn't make it wrong, and just because it is legal doesn't make it right. And I don't believe that you or anyone else ever passes judgement on someone like me because you give a crap if I am headed for hell. You just like the finger of sin pointed at someone other than yourself.

[ 02-25-2003, 02:51 AM: Message edited by: susanpalooza ]
 
Posted by Ingersoll (Member # 317) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by susanpalooza:

I don't know what to say, but I am left with a bad taste in my mouth.

[Laugh]
 
Posted by Shostie (Member # 112) on :
 
Incest is destructive to human gene pools (as is, technically homosexuality, but that's not damaging), as it causes gross genetic defects. Cats can be incestuous, I hear, and not fuck up their ponds. Anyone know why that is?

And besides, incest is just really, really weird.
 
Posted by pharris (Member # 211) on :
 
First of all, Suzie, you dont know me very well - Im certainly not telling you youre going to hell - I dont believe in that nonsense. Im just pointing out that religions do....

Furthermore, your point that jews thing christains are going to hell is incorrect - Hell is something that was invented by christians - there is no hell in the Jewish bible.

As for Shostie, cats arent the only ones. All animals will mate with parents and siblings. Humans are the only ones who have issues with it - and thats just a recent development!

In fact, the AKA (american kennel club) has no problems with purebred dogs being inbred. They are still considered acceptable.
 
Posted by elf (Member # 276) on :
 
...and just look at the British royalty!
 
Posted by pharris (Member # 211) on :
 
nearly any royals for that matter
 
Posted by Shostie (Member # 112) on :
 
quote:
As for Shostie, cats arent the only ones. All animals will mate with parents and siblings. Humans are the only ones who have issues with it - and thats just a recent development!

Dude, I live in Mississippi. Inbreeding happens far to frequently here. And just look at the Hapsburgs.
 
Posted by Keith The Bone (Member # 314) on :
 
Pharris are you for or against incest?

it appears to me as you are for incest
but you say that incest should be as exeptable as homosexuality , but you are totally against homosexuality and you are quite often harping on the the subject

so if infact you are pro-incest you are contridicting the views that you are always harping on

also i do believe , as a gay male that you are gay
because when i was in the closet i talked harshly about homosexuality , as do many closeted homos bacause some homo are playing a fasade in their own minds in and verbally to convince themselves and other that they are hetero-sexual because they feel that it is wrong or unmoral to be gay or to act upon their feeling towards other males
 
Posted by pharris (Member # 211) on :
 
I am against incest, KDK - but I am using it as a point. I think homosexuality is wrong. I am equating the two, as an example of how propaganda from the media has made homosexuality (which most people in this world find deviant and unacceptable) not only acceptable but TRENDY.

My distatse (no pun, I assure you) in this is that the homosexual agenda is to make homosexuality accessible to young people in schools ( which is already happening) for recruitment. Just like any cult, the best way to add to your numbers is to find the confused and depressed, and reach out to them 'leading the way' - this is CLEARLY what homosexual groups are doing in our schools on a daily basis, and through our media nearly every moment on television, music videos, etc.

Again, im using the incest to make a point. Most people will have no problems being disgusted by incest. However, incest is no more illegal than homosexual acts in nearly every state of this country. What makes it any more 'wrong'?
 
Posted by Blackout (Member # 7) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by pharris:
Suzie, I didnt write the article, I just posted it...

As for the homosexuality connecton, I feel you are wrong. The point is, it is exactly the same as consensual incest. Something that MOST people find offputting, but others participate in -

The fact remains that consensual incest, between two people over the age of 18 SOULD be, ideally, just as accepted as homosexuality. They just dont have as good a PR department.

While I can see the position you're trying to push with your argument. I don't agree with it at all. While the connection can be made between incest and homosexuality that they are both deviants from sexual relationships that further human reproduction, incest to me seems like a completely unhealthy thing - at least in our society. Why? Because I believe that anyone engaging in it, or at least 98% of the cases, have some sort of serious mental damage, or WILL suffer some sort of mental damage from it.

While it is natural for a child to experience sexual urges towards their parents as they grow up, a healthy child will detach from that and find healthy sexual relationships outside the family. When the line of family is crossed and a father is engaging in sex with his daughter, the daughter is going to have serious mental and sexual issues and will probably be screwed up for the rest of her life. She didn't develop normally, and she will have confusing feelings about her father most likely for the rest of her life.

Is that her father or her boyfriend? How will she ever have nornmal sexual relationships with other men when she has fucked her father? How will she ever again have a normal nurturing relationship from her father? If she is upset, and needs to go to her father as a parent, not a sex partner, for support, how will she do that and ever trust her father as a father when he will be trying to take her clothes off and 'get some'. It's just unhealthy all around and as the article even mentions - a child will grow up and have plenty of chances at intercourse and sexual relationships, but they only get once set of parents, and if the parnets break that line and turn themselves into hot sexual action, that kid is going to be SEVERELY screwed up.

I don't think that is the case at all with homosexuality. A person who is attracted to someone of the same sex is meeting that person on equal terms just as in a hetrosexual relationship. No one is being manipulated and no roles are being distorted. Sure... there ARE relationships both straight and gay where there is all sorts of manipulation going on but that's another issue and I am talking about an equal and healthy relationship here.

You keep trying to compare homosexuality to different things that just don't fly. You compared it to pedophilia saying that "well, if you are attracted to little boys are girls then it's what you're attracted to and so it's the same thing as homosexuality" but it's not. Once again, there is no manipulation, age domination, or deception going on (hopefully) in a helathy sexual relationship between two adults weather they are straight or gay. This is NOT the case in pedophilia, where the child is ABSOLUTELY being taken advantage of. The same goes for incest. Someone is being taken advantage of and even if that's not the case and in supposed 'healthy' cases where it seems all participants are willing and happy, I can guarantee you that if you probe deeper, you will see some serious issues soemwhere in that family that prevented normal development somewhere along the line.

But why all the arguments with examples that just don't fly? What EXACTLY are you so mad at, and what are you trying to prove?

Pharris.... are you fucking your sister? Is that where this is coming from? She IS a hottie... and wait... your DAD said she was a hot piece of ass right to my face!

GASP!

Oh my GOD.

It's all in the family isn't it?

THE SOURCE OF ALL OF PHARRIS' HATREDS AND PREJUDICES REVEALED!

- Blackout
 
Posted by Blackout (Member # 7) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by KDK PRANK CALLS:
Pharris and Bam Bam Bigelow. Separated at birth?
 -

And MY GOD that is funny. That IS Pharris.
 
Posted by Blackout (Member # 7) on :
 
ATTENTION - THIS IS PHARRIS POSTING ON BLACKOUT'S COMPUTER (Mine is tied up with videos all day today!)

I disagree with you wholeheartedly.

Your comments make SOME sense, but the very same arguements can be made against homosexuality. How many priests have been found out lately to have used their power, authority and age to manipulate not a few but THOUSANDS of children into performing homosexual acts?

How many of these kids are now homosexuals because of the mental damage this created?

The point that NO ONE SEEMS TO FUCKING BE ABLE TO COMPREHEND is that we have set up a society based on the COMMON ACCEPTED THREAD

JUST because YOU find incest to be disgusting, or based on manipulation or whatever, the case is you find it to be so because of what our SOCIETY has deemed correct and incorrect.

The very same thing goes for homosexuality. However, as the very beginning of this debate was speaking of, we are very easily able to be manipulated with propaganda.

And as the last 30 years has proven, the propaganda has worked.

Nearly EVERYONE in this country has been duped into believeing that homosexuality is totally acceptable, that it is biological, that is is normal. How has this happened? Again, MOST of the world (Includnig some 75 - 80 percent of America) finds homosexuality to be wrong.

I am just using incest AND homosexuality to cite an example. As for your later comments, Blackie, No, i do not condone incest, nor do I wish to sleep with my sister, my father (Excuse me!) nor any other member of my familty. If I had some hot cousin somewhere, then MAYBE. But I dont. SO case closed.

What I am 'mad' at is the rampant acceptance of something that I find UNACCEPTABLE and deviant. Again, just trying to make an example here (because I know youre all just happy as can be with gays running amok in our society) but consider the arguement Ive made. How would you feel if the shoe was on the other foot and YOU weer the one whos convictions were called bigoted? Imagine if Incest was the accepted norm. Would you speak out against it? Would you be offended and disgusted that It shows up constantly, on television shows, in books and plays - would it bother you that mainstream America was not only becoming tolerant, but LOVING incest? You probably would not. And when you were attacked because of your convictions, you would do exactly what I ahave been doing.

Contrary to popular belief, I dont hate homosexuals. I hate the notion that it has become so acceptable, and I loathe the day that my children have to deal with homosexual recruiting in their schools, by their music videos and favorite celebrities.

Again, I DONT HATE QUEERS (I will call them names though - I have no problem with that!) KDK< as much as I think you are morally reprehensible for partaking in homosexual activities, I certianly dont hate you. That goes for you too, Suzie. I just think that an activity youve chosen to partake in is dreadfully wrong. I feel it is my obligation, because of my convictions, to tell you this, and to debate my side of the arguement to the best of my ability.

Perhaps by doing so, maybe ONE person out there will see my point. And then it will all have been worthwhile.
 
Posted by elf (Member # 276) on :
 
Hee hee - the funny thing is. KDK and Susanpalooza are getting laid. Regularly. And I do not doubt....well. And isn't this what it all comes down to?
 
Posted by pharris (Member # 211) on :
 
Elfie, i wouldnt want THAT kind of sick sex. Its just plum wrong.

And you know, you may think im jealous. Hell, ok, im fat - but who the hell wants to eat after you;ve had a dick in your mouth all day?

How 'bout some more bread pudding!!?!?!?!
 
Posted by pharris (Member # 211) on :
 
Once again, there is no manipulation, age domination, or deception going on (hopefully) in a helathy sexual relationship between two adults weather they are straight or gay.

- No such thing as a 'healthy' gay relationship.

And, again, in MOST gay situations, there is nothing BUT manipulation, domination and deception going on. Dont kid yourself.
 
Posted by KDK PRANK CALLS (Member # 56) on :
 
the media has made homosexuality (which most people in this world find deviant and unacceptable) not only acceptable but TRENDY

First of all, that doesn't even make sense. If it's "trendy", then it's hardly "unacceptable". Second, the media is not pushing forth with some kind of gay agenda. They are merely reacting to a huge segment of the population that is in recent years finding the courage to come forward and leave behind their own self-loathing. The Kinsey report found many, many years ago that 1 in 10 people are gay or bisexual. That's 10%, folks. How many more were there that couldn't be honest about their sexuality? What percentage of the US population is black? The latest figure I was able to find said 7%, but I'd expect it's higher. Probably around 10%. So with such a large population of gays, lesbians and bisexuals, it is inevitable that producers would want to capitalise on this huge market. There are TV networks devoted to that segment of the population that is black. Perhaps someday there will be networks devoted to the equally large segment that is gay. Your so-called "media agenda" is simply producers trying to tap into a largely untapped market. It also doesn't hurt that the average income of gay people is higher than the average income of straight people. Also, with so many gay people excelling in creative fields such as music and art and literature, there are bound to be an inordiantely high number of gay people in the entertainment business.
Why don't you lose some weight and go out and find yourself a cute guy and get it over with. The self-hatred you are keeping bottled up is being projected as hatred for others. It's completely obvious to everyone here except you. Your favorite concert was a fucking Debbie Gibson concert, for christ's sake! That's too gay for either me or Keith. Debbie Gibson sang songs for pre-pubescent girls. I bet you love broadway showtunes too.
A word of advice for Blackout (who, incidently, does not set off my gaydar in the least)...SLEEP WITH YOUR BEDROOM DOOR LOCKED!
 
Posted by pharris (Member # 211) on :
 
See? More recruiting!!!

A gay cannot accept that someone would be anti-gay! Never! It just cant be. If someone says something negative about gays, they of course, are in denial and need to take one up the ass.

Sorry to tell you this, KDK, but your recruitment propaganda wont work on me. Im not a fag, and never will be one in the future.

As for Debbie Gibson - dude, shes fucking hot. Now, if I was gay, I would be looking at her male back up dancers or what have you, but the fact remains, I was looking at Debbie. Just like I look at Britney and Christina - With a RAGING HARD ON FOR A HOT CHICK'S PUSSY, not anothe dude's rectum.

And yes, I like showtunes. I realize thats a gay stereotype, but whatever.
 
Posted by pharris (Member # 211) on :
 
and your ecenomic data is incorrect...

• As far as income goes, straight men made $29,162 versus gay men's $28,618. With graduate degrees, the discrepancy between straight and gay men's salaries jumped to $4,000, or $36,072 for straight men to $32,465 for gay men.

And tht is FROM a progay website, gay.com

Just goes to show how een the gay are incorrrectly influenced by their own propaganda machine!
 
Posted by Galador (Member # 33) on :
 
quote:

The very same thing goes for homosexuality. However, as the very beginning of this debate was speaking of, we are very easily able to be manipulated with propaganda.

And as the last 30 years has proven, the propaganda has worked.

Nearly EVERYONE in this country has been duped into believeing that homosexuality is totally acceptable, that it is biological, that is is normal. How has this happened? Again, MOST of the world (Includnig some 75 - 80 percent of America) finds homosexuality to be wrong.


I would make the argument that for the last 2 thousand years the propaganda has been enforcing the idea that homosexuality is wrong, and that nowadays we're just beginning to reverse the deathgrip that popular culture has had on that. 30 years' worth of deprogramming 2000 years of propaganda is just the beginning. You've only been duped into believing homosexuality is wrong.
Everything right is wrong again, just like in the Long, Long Trailer.

James
 
Posted by KDK PRANK CALLS (Member # 56) on :
 
All the dishes got broken and the car kept driving and nobody would stop to save her. Well said, Galador.

No, Pharris, I have no gay agenda. I don't care how many people are gay. I don't like most gay people. And no, I don't think that anyone who is anti-gay is a closet-case. But you are most definately gay. Why don't you visit a psychiatrist about this and see what he or she has to say? Here's an idea for a great show : book a psychiatrist to interview Pharris on the air.

[ 02-26-2003, 06:26 PM: Message edited by: KDK PRANK CALLS ]
 
Posted by pharris (Member # 211) on :
 
But you are most definately gay. Why don't you visit a psychiatrist about this and see what he or she has to say?

- That would basically involve a desire to have sex with men, which I have none.

Stop living by your lifestyle's stereotypes. I am about as opposite from gay as you can possbily get. I have no interest in it's seedy lifestyle, getting it on with men or which celebrities looked fabulous in that outfit.

Furthermore, I resent the fact, which I stated above, that all the gay community can do when they are attacked is say 'Youre gay - stop denying it'. Its a common tool used all the time, and its nonsense.

Now, if youll excuse me, Im going to look at naked chicks online.
 
Posted by susanpalooza (Member # 348) on :
 
Just as Blackout said, your arguments that you provide as proof that homosexuality and other things, like in this example, incest, are the same, just don't fly.

You keep regurgitating the same thing. Okay, you are entitled to your opinion that what 'mos do is icky. (Just like how I think of hetero sex. Yuck. Been there, tried that.) But there is nothing to fear and loathe here. No matter what anyone says, you can no more make someone gay then you can make them straight no matter how hard you try, or how trendy it is. Your children are safe, dude. You made your point, now let's just move on, can we?

The difference between the animal world and ours is that we can think, and in a higher sense than animals, we can love. Animals would seldom die for another animal that wasn't its offspring. They can't think of how damaging it would be to to have sex with it's sister, brother, father or mother. But since most animals aren't capable of having deep thoughts, then that is probably why it isn't damaging to them to be incestuous. (But on a side note, I have seen the offspring of incestuous cats. It wasn't pretty. Rabbits can do it all day with any other rabbit, and they do.)

But I digress.

Pharris, as much as you think it is about sex, it really isn't. Of course, there are homosexuals to whom it really is all about sex (just like their horny heterosexual counterparts.) But the majority of people are having sex with people they love deeply. At least most of the time.

This is not true of incest. If you really loved your daughter/son, you wouldn't want to have sex with them. And not just because society says it's wrong, but because it, at the very least, complicates and confuses things way more than they ever should be.

But the most offensive thing I keep observing here is you calling me Suzie. I haven't been called that since I was in kindergarten. And I have slapped people for less.

[Resuming normal tone]

Okay, let me put a question that usually stumps even the most staunch homo hater. Who are hermaphrodites supposed to be with? No matter what sex the other person is, they are having homosexual sex, if they are both sexes, and they are. Or are they allowed, and only them, to have sex with someone of either sex? Or only other hermaphrodite? Or did God make them to be alone? If that is so, then why would God do that? I have a hard time swallowing that one. (The whole b'shert[sp?] thing.) And don't even waste my time telling me that God made them to have surgery, because that is saying that God makes mistakes. And, if that is true, then I give up.

[ 02-27-2003, 06:59 PM: Message edited by: susanpalooza ]
 
Posted by Keith The Bone (Member # 314) on :
 
Stop living by your lifestyle's stereotypes. "pharris"

pardon me , but me and dave do not live by the gay sterotypes
in fact we don't agree with the stereotypes of the gay lifstyles , nor do we try in any way try to live ours lives that way.
most staight people in fact do not know that we are gay unless they are told

secondly,

I was looking at Debbie. Just like I look at Britney and Christina - With a RAGING HARD ON FOR A HOT CHICK'S PUSSY, not anothe dude's rectum. "Pharris"

i agree with you that debbie gibson , christina agular , brittney among other women are totally hot and if i had a chance and i were single i would screw any of them.
remember my post "who is hottest" , appearentlly i also find women hot also and im gay, well bi to be technical
 
Posted by DoniGIRL (Member # 256) on :
 
Um.....I really don't want to remember that post.

But thats just me....

~*Doni*~
 
Posted by Shostie (Member # 112) on :
 
Does every thread Pharris start have to degenerate into a discussion on homosexuality?
 
Posted by Blackout (Member # 7) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by pharris:
See? More recruiting!!!

A gay cannot accept that someone would be anti-gay! Never! It just cant be. If someone says something negative about gays, they of course, are in denial and need to take one up the ass.

Sorry to tell you this, KDK, but your recruitment propaganda wont work on me. Im not a fag, and never will be one in the future.

As for Debbie Gibson - dude, shes fucking hot. Now, if I was gay, I would be looking at her male back up dancers or what have you, but the fact remains, I was looking at Debbie. Just like I look at Britney and Christina - With a RAGING HARD ON FOR A HOT CHICK'S PUSSY, not anothe dude's rectum.

And yes, I like showtunes. I realize thats a gay stereotype, but whatever.

Alright Pharris.

Your bitterness amd disgusting lewdness have gone too far to the point where you are now driving people away from the site. It is one thing to post your opinion (however wrong it is) and have open debates on the board, which I openly encourage - but it is another thing when you get into one of your extremely offensive hitler moods and get so pissed at everyone that your start posting lewd JACKASS posts like the one above, and using MY account to post your crap (DO NOT EVER DO THAT AGAIN, if you can't get on your computer then WAIT), I have to step in and stop it.

You are my friend, and most of the time I think you are a fairly cool, caring person, but when you get like this it disgusts me, and it just drives people away, because you have way too much hate in you. Why exactly do you care so much about another persons sexual preference? No one cares about yours. If you were gay, we would all be your friends just the same. You say you have no problem being friends with gays, that you just don't like their sexual lifestyle, but how could you possibly be friends with someone with all this huge amount of hate and disrespect in you? I mean honestly, why don't you go from a hate group or something because you are starting to sound no better than stupid white power skinheads with all the bullshit you are spewing. Why do you keep bringing stuff like this up and turning these boards into stupid flame wars over your hatered, and then get so offended as if you are some persecuted fool who no one understands and everyone is attacking.

Here's a hint jackass, if almost EVERYONE on this board, and everyone you meet in real life dissagrees with your views and thinks you have some psycological problems, perhaps you should take a step back, reflect a little bit and reconsider WHY. But oh no, wiat, wait, you will say we are all recruits, yes, everyone of us here - for the GAY agenda. Sure... I have to tell you, some gay guys came by long ago and gave me, Howard, Doni, Marti, and everyone else on this board a few thousand dollars to bring you over.

I mean really Rob, your examples and arguments don't fly or hold any weight, your views are twisted, and it seems like it is YOU who has an agenda you are trying to push. YOU keep on starting posts like these. Marti was talking about completely different things and you brought it back to your gay hating again. I mean, if you want to hate gay people, fine, but shut the fuck up about it. No one cares, really, and your posts are becoming more and more assholic every minute. Is assholic a word? It should be.

It's one thing to lightly bash eachother and our foibles for fun, but you make it serious, and your posts become less intelligent and more vile each time.

So go ahead, try and be witty and persecuted and debunk everyone for being part of the 'gay agenda' bullshit one last time, and then lets just get off of this. Poeple have their own sexual preference and you have issues. Lets just leave this topic.

- Blackout
 
Posted by KDK PRANK CALLS (Member # 56) on :
 
Well said, Blackout. I thought all fat guys were supposed to be fun-loving and jolly. Pharris is just angry, hatefull and smells of ham.
 
Posted by Shostie (Member # 112) on :
 
quote:
So go ahead, try and be witty and persecuted and debunk everyone for being part of the 'gay agenda' bullshit one last time, and then lets just get off of this. Poeple have their own sexual preference and you have issues. Lets just leave this topic.

Tell 'em Steve-Dave!
 
Posted by KDK PRANK CALLS (Member # 56) on :
 
I have to admit one thing, though. At least Pharris sparks some interesting debate and discussion in here instead of it always being like Blackout's private answering machine all the time.
 
Posted by SAHFilms (Member # 249) on :
 
I am in love with Pharris.

I can no longer help myself. I have been living here and I just ...*sigh*...can't keep my eyes off of him. He is so much MAN.

I am sorry Joimik - but I have been living with this for too long.

It is time that the world knew.

I love The Pharris.

- SAH films.
 
Posted by Blackout (Member # 7) on :
 
Hi,

This is Blackout.
I'm sorry I can't come to my boards right now,
but if you'll leave your name, number, and a brief message insulting someone's lifestyle or sexual preference, or if you just admit how gay you are, I'll post back to you as soon as possible.

*BEEP*
 
Posted by Gweky (Member # 360) on :
 
ONE TIME THIS GAY GUY CAME UP TO ME AND SAID HI SO I WAS LIKE WHOA GET AWAY FROM ME YOU HAVE TEH GAY
 
Posted by Blackout (Member # 7) on :
 
Oh NO, not THE GAY!

- Blackout
 
Posted by Maestra (Member # 370) on :
 
You know, they make an ointment for that.
 
Posted by Gweky (Member # 360) on :
 
I sure hope they do, with gays being the bane of society and all that...
 
Posted by unclecrazyface (Member # 275) on :
 
EVERYONE Listen.

Pharris has a right to express his point of view, and frankly I applaude him for his candor. He has, in fact, inspired me to come forward with my own disapproval, a disapproval which is very reminiscent of Pharris' anti gay sentiment.

I, like many others, am against the overweight.

This is not some cheap shot to get back at Pharris. In fact, I am quite fond of Pharris. He 's good people as they say, but I disagree with the "fat" lifestyle and here's why:

-It is unnatural. The human body wasn't meant to be that way. Being overweight poses numerous threats to one's health. I read an article a few years ago which stated that Cardiovascular disease caused by being fat resulted in more deaths per year that Drunk driving, AIDS, cancer, newsies and a few other things combined. But perhaps it was merely propaganda.

-Despite this propaganda there is an equally powerful movement in the media and entertainment industries to paint "fatties" in popular light. Look how many fat people are shown as prominent, "normal", members of society in movies and TV. It's sickening. The worst example of this was the glorification of the overweight by that fat comedic actor Chris Farley. He was regarded as some sort of role model for young kids. The popularity of his movie Tommy Boy increased the fat incidence among adolescents by 13% I think. THey are targeting our children!!!!! Well you see how Farley ended up.

-History has proven that once being fat becomes popular and trendy that that society tends to decline. Look at the British empire. It became quite fashionable to be "hefty" during the height Of the British empire's reign and look where they ended up. They couldn't even hold on to India. WHy because they be skinny.

-It is in the Bible. GLUTTONY is one of the 7 deadly sins is it not? WHat more can I say about that? God has spoken and Fat folks will go to hell. I mean we are here to procreate aren't we? ANd if you're fat , who's gonna want to procreate with yo big ass?

-FInally I believe that being fat is a choice. For some it is a pathology. Sure fatties argue that they were born that way because they have an overactive thyroid gland or because their parents were fat or because Biggie Smalls is fat. But the fact is you may have fat tendencies, but you ain;t fat til you put the twinkies in your mouth.

Once again let me state that I do not hate Fat people. I am not a hater, but I simply disagree and it is my right to do so. Now i'm off to the gym.

peace
 
Posted by KDK PRANK CALLS (Member # 56) on :
 
Well said, Uncle. Now, let's discuss what it tells you about a person when they are fat...
If someone is fat, it shows you that they have little self-esteem and do not hold themselves in very high regard. If they cared about themselves at all, they'd knuckle down and shed the pounds.
Obviously, if a person is fat, it shows you that they are lazy. This is why fat people are discriminated against when applying for jobs. And rightly so. Why should an employer hire a fat person who is obviously too lazy to do any work or exercise enough to lower their body weight?
Third, fattitude is a sure sign of a lack of will power. A fatty doesn't have the will power to stay away from the doughnuts long enough to lose any weight.
Fatness is also a sure sign of mental illness. It's a sign that someone is drowning their sorrows and attempting to escape their problems or repress painfull memories through the abuse of food.
Aside from all of this, fat people are unclean and smell. They sweat from just about anything because it is such a strain to simply move their blubber around. Since cleanliness is next to godliness, fat people are all surely going to hell.
That's all for now, but join me next time as I compare obesity to beastiality.

(the views expressed above do not necessarily represent those of KDK and it's afffilates. hell, k-dawg is a fatass too.)

[ 03-07-2003, 04:27 PM: Message edited by: KDK PRANK CALLS ]
 
Posted by DoniGIRL (Member # 256) on :
 
Wowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.....

First let me clarify for those who don't know that I was a fat chick, and continue to struggle with weight, therefore I do have the right to speak my mind on this issue. I do believe that obesity is a disease, be it of mind or body or both, and most certainly kills just as many if not more people than cigarettes etc.

Knowing what its like to be overweight I gotta say its not easy. And I wasn't even grossly overweight. The stereotype that fat people are just "lazy" is way harsh. Not to toot my own horn, but I'm one of the most ambitious people I know, and being overweight didn't change that. My drive was simply focused elsewhere. I've had a lot of chubby/overweight friends throughout my life as well and I have to say that they are anything but lazy. My best friendin high school was close to 300 pounds, and her mother was well over 400. We were always going for walks, swimming, roller skating etc. So to say that "all fat people are lazy" is entirely inaccurate. Lazy about their eating habits, okay, but I think its really unfair to judge someones drive and determination by the fact that they are overweight. Believe me I know PLENTY of slackers who are thin and fat so that argument is invalid in my book.

Overweight people generally make bad food decisions. In todays society its so much easier to go through the drive through at McDonalds than it is to go home and cook a meal. When I was on the Body For Life program, I was toned and overall healthier. But this also required a lot of time and money and it was a lifestyle that I couldn't maintain. I've been on almost every diet under the sun, and its VERY difficult to stick to a diet with a hectic schedule, because the good ones require a lot of planning and prep time for meals.

This most certainly isn't an excuse though. If someone really wants to lose weight, they can do it. I gave every excuse under the sun when I was heavier - big boned, slow metabolism, blah blah. And really its all crap. I just wasn't ready to
change.

Oh, and believe it or not, people DO have medical conditions that cause them to retain weight. I don't think that its an excuse for obesity, but if someone is carrying some extra pounds, it very might well be due to medication side effects, hypothyroidism etc. I found out that I am one of those people with hypothyroidism and it makes sense because its almost impossible for me to lose weight now, even if I REALLY try. I might lose a few pounds, but then it gets to a standstill and I get discouraged and give up.

Its easy to tell people who are overweight "stop eating" or "go exercise", but for a lot of people its much more than that. There are people (like myself) who have food addictions, people with depression and other psychological disorders that they have to battle first before then can even begin to overcome the very difficult struggle of losing weight. Unfortunately it usually takes a very long time to work through these issues.

And just as many of us don't agree with Pharris' position on homosexuality, there are a lot of people that wouldn't agree with my position on obesity. I don't think that obesity is okay, and I do think that anyone who is overweight seriously increases their risks of premature death. But at the same time people need to make their own choices. Some people are willing to sacrifice a few years of their lives to avoid the "hassles" of leading a healthy lifestyle and there are people that just like being overweight. Who are we to criticize them as long as they're happy?

Just my two cents [Big Grin]

~*Doni*~
 
Posted by Maestra (Member # 370) on :
 
Saying that all fat people are lazy is a huge logical fallacy. Not all are, some yes. But then again, there are those of the thinner variety that are lazy as well. Hence why it is 3:15 in the afternoon and I am still in my pajamas. [Sleepy]
 
Posted by KDK PRANK CALLS (Member # 56) on :
 
Damn! I was expecting everyone to have a problem with the "fat people are smelly" part or the "fat people all go to hell" part, not the "fat people are lazy" part. As i'm sure you could tell from that post, it was not meant to be a serious attack on fatties. I even wrote a disclaimer at the end.
 
Posted by Shostie (Member # 112) on :
 
Wait, are we somehow comparing fat people to gay people? What about gay fat people?

Or is this one of those situations where I skimmed over the longer threads because I don't have time to read them all before work and end up with a mish-mash of words taken completely out of context.

Either way, this sudden shift in topic (again) is confusing. Let's hear it for *NEW* threads.
 
Posted by Maestra (Member # 370) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by KDK PRANK CALLS:
Damn! I was expecting everyone to have a problem with the "fat people are smelly" part or the "fat people all go to hell" part, not the "fat people are lazy" part. As i'm sure you could tell from that post, it was not meant to be a serious attack on fatties. I even wrote a disclaimer at the end.

I could tell. I was just being silly and stating the fact that I was still in my pjs well into the afternoon.

So, about those new topics of conversation. Yea, we need to look into those . . .
 


Blackout aka Michael Biggins - Blackout.com , the artist known as Blackout, Blackout's Box, Blackout.com, Blurpinkle, Blackout's Box Studios, Blackout's Box Entertainment, Blurpinkle, Hathouse Films & TheTricksters.org (C)1995-2015

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0