At 10/29/12 04:09 PM, Insanctuary wrote:
No, you don't understand. This is a mechanistic compensation of the human mind. They can't stop it because they have to constantly reassure themselves of their own stupid beliefs. Religious people do this. Stupid kids do this. Women do this. Men do this. It is a mechanism, and you need to stop ignoring it. These are childhood insecurities, and they should be properly addressed.

Well it's too late for them to not be homo. Like you said psychologically imbedded for WHATEVER circumstance that may be. But what parents can do is make sure that their child/ adolescent doesn't feel special nor universally hated. It's a win-win for everyone.

At 10/29/12 04:13 PM, Entice wrote:

At 10/29/12 04:11 PM, Insanctuary wrote: Notice how he says 'I hope', which is a statement people say under a particular rebellious attitude.

That depends on context.

This is a personal discussion, therefore you should pay great heed to the words you use.

Then he said 'probably' because he could sustain his stupid reassurement.

I said probably because I do not try and convince people of absolutes and I cannot say absolutely that homosexuality never causes mental problems in itself. However, I do not believe that it has negative effects in the majority of cases.

You thought of a Utopia. You clearly have no hesitation in making up absolutes towards me either, so why act like you don't make absolutes? I know you do.

Are you gonna lock me up and give me electroshock therapy now?

No.

At 10/29/12 04:17 PM, II2none wrote: Well it's too late

It's never too late.

At 10/29/12 04:38 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 10/29/12 04:17 PM, II2none wrote: Well it's too late

It's never too late.

If it's a psychological cause then yeah, it's too late.only thing they can do is not let there sexuality define them.

At 10/29/12 04:44 PM, II2none wrote: If it's a psychological cause then yeah, it's too late.only thing they can do is not let there sexuality define them.

Actually, it is not a problem. Their experience is so far around the corner, that if we were to tell all of them what they were actually experiencing, they would be overloaded with logic. It is clear that the reason why there is somebody in the relationship pretending to be the other gender, is simply because this isn't about sexual preferences at all - -that is only a distraction to cover up what it really is. That gender role switching nonsense is triggered by no other than your mind. Ever noticed that all mental compensations are logically backwards? Women with no intelligence get big breasts, people who can't get love get money or sympathy, males with small dicks buy limos, bullies pick on little kids, et cetera. These are all mental mechanisms that people are too stupid and ignorant to understand.

I didn't ask for this. Could a mod just come in and ban these hooligans already?

At 10/29/12 07:52 PM, CrazySquirrel124 wrote: I didn't ask for this. Could a mod just come in and ban these hooligans already?

You intiate a sensitive topic, you get the horns.

Not to backseat mod, but I'm legitimately curious as to what constitutes hate speech on this site. My personal metric would probably include someone calling all gay people retarded delusional childish monkeys.

At 10/29/12 11:08 AM, Ragnarokia wrote: But of course it is only ever when a gay person says they like another guy that suddenly the shit hits the fan and people start going on about it.

You raise an excellent point I hadn't really thought of before. Good shit.

At 10/29/12 12:49 PM, Earfetish wrote: I would reckon if we all knew the details of your sexual quirks, we'd find something that filled us with disgust, but it's not for anyone else to judge you for your sexual preferences.

Is autophilia a thing?

At 10/29/12 07:58 PM, Dr-Worm wrote: Not to backseat mod, but I'm legitimately curious as to what constitutes hate speech on this site. My personal metric would probably include someone calling all gay people retarded delusional childish monkeys.

That would be ludicrous. I don't hate people, I simply have brutals things to say to people who deserve to be brutally scrutinized for being brutally dihonest with themselves.

At 10/29/12 08:00 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

That would be ludicrous. I don't hate people, I simply have brutals things to say to people who deserve to be brutally scrutinized for being brutally dihonest with themselves.

And you brutally rape dogs that have not done anything brutal to you.

At 10/29/12 08:02 PM, koopahermit wrote: And you brutally rape dogs that have not done anything brutal to you.

And you are being brutally dishonest with yourself by assuming I brutally rape dogs that have not done anything brutal to me, so that means I have to brutally scrutinize you -- oh wait, I already did countless times and you had to cower your way into hiding behind obnoxious pictures.

Tsk, tsk.

At 10/29/12 08:05 PM, Insanctuary wrote: And you are being brutally dishonest with yourself by assuming I brutally rape dogs that have not done anything brutal to me

It's okay, guys, he only brutally rapes dogs when they bite him first.

At 10/29/12 08:05 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 10/29/12 08:02 PM, koopahermit wrote: And you brutally rape dogs that have not done anything brutal to you.

And you are being brutally dishonest with yourself by assuming I brutally rape dogs that have not done anything brutal to me, so that means I have to brutally scrutinize you -- oh wait, I already did countless times and you had to cower your way into hiding behind obnoxious pictures.

Tsk, tsk.

And thank you for brutally being the worst poster on this site and brutally helping me brutally increase my post count brutally.

At 10/29/12 08:08 PM, koopahermit wrote: And thank you for brutally being the worst poster on this site and brutally helping me brutally increase my post count brutally.

You're welcome.

At 10/29/12 08:17 PM, 4761 wrote: I don't know about you guys, but Insanctuary sure has a colorful vocabulary.

Hey look you guys I found a pic of Insanctuary online!

At 10/29/12 08:21 PM, Dr-Worm wrote: Hey look you guys I found a pic of Insanctuary online!

He would tear out your pelvis, use it as a helmet, bash your face in with it, fuck your skull religiously, then jam it up your ass; when you squeal with all of the blood flowing out of your mouth, he would take your tongue, take a razor and a hammer and cut the tongue out in sectors, and each piece of that tongue will be cut into more pieces so that you could no longer talk shit about him and die from terrible blood lost as fucked up ugly.

At 10/29/12 08:28 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

He would tear out your pelvis, use it as a helmet, bash your face in with it, fuck your skull religiously, then jam it up your ass; when you squeal with all of the blood flowing out of your mouth, he would take your tongue, take a razor and a hammer and cut the tongue out in sectors, and each piece of that tongue will be cut into more pieces so that you could no longer talk shit about him and die from terrible blood lost as fucked up ugly.

My god, Insanctuary, you are the most BR00TAL user on Newgrounds. I wish I could meet you in real life.

insanctuary, bruh, for reals.

if you were actually a flash animator or something like that maybe you'd belong here and have a reason to stay on newgrounds. however, you're not. so, why are you on this bbs?

i can't help but get this overwhelming vibe from you that the only reason you stay on newgrounds bbs is the security
that nobody wants to put in the time to reply soundly, much less read, any of the shit you write. so, you can get away with saying anything that comes out of your ass.

it's kind of like how kids don't like going to college because they were badasses as highschool seniors.

i mean, why arn't you on another forum like JREF... were you banned for some kind of aspergic spaz out or something?

At 10/29/12 08:34 PM, Gramiscus wrote: insanctuary, bruh, for reals.

I've got time to waste.

At 10/29/12 08:41 PM, Entice wrote: Shouldn't the messiah be busy?

Nah, he's decided us puny mortals are not worthy of being saved so that clears up his schedule pretty much.

At 10/29/12 08:38 PM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 10/29/12 08:34 PM, Gramiscus wrote: insanctuary, bruh, for reals.

I've got time to waste.

ok well that's fair

do you know anything about medicine: biology, chemistry, physics ... ?

The thread title is slightly misleading.

At 10/29/12 08:34 PM, Gramiscus wrote:

Stuff about why Insanctuary should leave NG

At 10/29/12 08:53 PM, koopahermit wrote: Stuff about why Insanctuary should leave NG

NO. BAD. We do NOT do that here.

At 10/29/12 08:53 PM, koopahermit wrote:

At 10/29/12 08:34 PM, Gramiscus wrote:

Stuff about why Insanctuary should leave NG

All in favor of sending Insanctuary to Beastforum, say "AYE".

Alot of the "faggot" types I've met are the most disgusting narcissistic people I've ever met. I have nothing against gays at all, I don't care what you suck or fuck.

But the "faggot" types have always basically been like the catty slutty females that are self-conscious. I've always heard them make arguments about how disgusting females are and why being gay is sooo much better. They also see females as threats and seem to have a twisted fantasy of turning straight guys gay precisely for sexual reasons.

This is just based on the few "faggot" types I met. But holy shit were they fucked up.

ITT: My opinion > yours and you should be banned for it.

Also, Insancutary is fucking with all of you.

I can't agree more. I hate faggots aswell, with the definition you provided. I don't mind regular gay people at all though, as long as there not flaunting it around. If you simply like the same sex of your own, I don't mind. If you're a floating around, making noise kinda gay guy, I hate you.

PS: I died a little bit inside the day I found out Neil Patrick Harris was gay, mainly because in every show/movie he was in, he played an extremely straight guy. I don't mind it now that I know though.

I'm not sure exactly what the point of responding here is but I'm working from home this week.

At 10/29/12 10:43 AM, Insanctuary wrote:

Love is an illusion, but loving is an art. Do you have short-term memory? Homosexuals inlove is no more to the point pedophiles like little kids (sexually) and 70+ year old white males love those benjamins (relations to love).

Spoken like someone who has no idea of what love means. Homosexuals can be 'in love' with each other because they can both experience the emotion of love and it can me a mutual experience. Children and money cannot reciprocate the emotion of romantic love. Whether the emotion felt by a pedophile is comparable to the emotion I feel towards my girlfriend is beside the point, because the object of their desire cannot consent to the relationship, hence why society views consenting love between homosexuals in a different light to romantic relationships between adults and children.

If you think 'love is an illusion' then what do you call the relationship between your mother and father (or your friends' mothers and fathers)? And then you follow it up with 'loving is an art' like you're pretending to be profound, again.

It's childish perversion, just as much as religion, conspiracies, politics are all part of one giant misconceived orgy of childish delusions.

Your opinions are childish delusions borne from the immature mind of someone who thinks he can't be wrong.

Actually, you are putting words in my mouth. My intellect is not why I have power over you; it's your blooming ignorance.

It is surprising that you think I'm ignorant when I could probably tell you more about a wide range of topics and world events than you could. It's tempting to ask you what you're doing with your life, whether you have a job, your relationship status and how old you are, because I have a strong hunch that I am beating you in all of these areas. But you'll think I'm more ignorant than you because you're the expert at feigning intelligence while you discriminate against sexual minorities on messageboards.

No, it's not retarded at all. This is retarded living, which is why our human race is so retarded. People are doing everything wrong like monkeys on LSD.

Where do you see yourself in five years time?

Alright, I made a mistake here. I got him mixed up with another guy who did die; woe is me. Oh well, Richard Dawkins can still defend himself.

Yes, you meant Christopher Hitchens probably, who said nothing about the gay gene - that's Richard Dawkins. And you still haven't provided evidence for Dawkins' opinions about genetics being misrepresented by gay people, nor have you linked to evidence of gay people calling 0.5 per cent of the animal world gay. Why haven't you done this yet? I've asked you for it like three times. Is it because you don't know what you're talking about, or were you just bullshitting?

Furthermore, don't drag Dawkins down with you - he would detest your viewpoints about homosexuality.

No, homosexuality is a delusion that has no evidence to back it up except childish monkeys that have no idea how psychology, biology or even how the world works. They are all sick puppies.

And what do you know about "psychology, biology or even how the world works"? You don't even have a job, you've never experienced love, and you previously said itt that my Sociology studies into gender "came from systematical vomit", so it's looking pretty likely that you have no basis for your claims of expertise in these areas and no academic or workplace training in any related area.

At 10/30/12 05:34 AM, Earfetish wrote: I'm not sure exactly what the point of responding here is but I'm working from home this week.

At 10/29/12 10:43 AM, Insanctuary wrote:

Love is an illusion, but loving is an art. Do you have short-term memory? Homosexuals inlove is no more to the point pedophiles like little kids (sexually) and 70+ year old white males love those benjamins (relations to love).

Spoken like someone who has no idea of what love means. Homosexuals can be 'in love' with each other because they can both experience the emotion of love and it can me a mutual experience. Children and money cannot reciprocate the emotion of romantic love. Whether the emotion felt by a pedophile is comparable to the emotion I feel towards my girlfriend is beside the point, because the object of their desire cannot consent to the relationship, hence why society views consenting love between homosexuals in a different light to romantic relationships between adults and children.

To claim that love is always a normal function is not a normal function. You have to remember that we are falsely accusing of life's objects, and we misinterpret that everything around us are mere objects. Just because we have holes and can experience a feeling does not mean we should let it blindly lead us because of the comfort. People cut themselves. People kill. People lie and abuse people all for the feeling of love and comfort. Love is a feeling that is not associated to what we accuse of it for being.

If you think 'love is an illusion' then what do you call the relationship between your mother and father (or your friends' mothers and fathers)? And then you follow it up with 'loving is an art' like you're pretending to be profound, again.

They are individual minds that have a biologically shared trait. Nothing more. I don't love them because they are my parents. I love them as the individuals they are. There is no reason to force yourself to love that of which you do not love, and only for the sake of loving what we were conditioned to love.

It's childish perversion, just as much as religion, conspiracies, politics are all part of one giant misconceived orgy of childish delusions.

Your opinions are childish delusions borne from the immature mind of someone who thinks he can't be wrong.

Provide an argument. Don't say it. Explain it.

Actually, you are putting words in my mouth. My intellect is not why I have power over you; it's your blooming ignorance.

It is surprising that you think I'm ignorant when I could probably tell you more about a wide range of topics and world events than you could. It's tempting to ask you what you're doing with your life, whether you have a job, your relationship status and how old you are, because I have a strong hunch that I am beating you in all of these areas. But you'll think I'm more ignorant than you because you're the expert at feigning intelligence while you discriminate against sexual minorities on messageboards.

I'm not surprised. You are using a generic lifestyle to defend your position. You assume a job, a relationship and having a generic life defines you who you are as a person in world where jobs are of corrupt persons, relationships that are sincere and genuine are rare and a generic life that knows nothing of life. A mannequin that watches the real world through a window, as people dress you and undress you for their own generic purposes.

No, it's not retarded at all. This is retarded living, which is why our human race is so retarded. People are doing everything wrong like monkeys on LSD.

Where do you see yourself in five years time?

Lost, for this is the way it is. No manual. No truths. Endless complications and excuses.

Alright, I made a mistake here. I got him mixed up with another guy who did die; woe is me. Oh well, Richard Dawkins can still defend himself.

Yes, you meant Christopher Hitchens probably, who said nothing about the gay gene - that's Richard Dawkins. And you still haven't provided evidence for Dawkins' opinions about genetics being misrepresented by gay people, nor have you linked to evidence of gay people calling 0.5 per cent of the animal world gay. Why haven't you done this yet? I've asked you for it like three times. Is it because you don't know what you're talking about, or were you just bullshitting?

I don't stop to record the obvious. The obvious is that 0.5% of the animal kingdom are accused of acting in homosexual traits. The argument is there. Go ask gay people, then come back to me. The evidence you want is not on this side, it is on their side. They are the ones making the claim. I'm only redistributing in point of ingress to the complications they bear.

Furthermore, don't drag Dawkins down with you - he would detest your viewpoints about homosexuality.

Dawkins has only argued the moral side of homosexuality. There is no evidence of homosexuality in an objective sense.

No, homosexuality is a delusion that has no evidence to back it up except childish monkeys that have no idea how psychology, biology or even how the world works. They are all sick puppies.

And what do you know about "psychology, biology or even how the world works"? You don't even have a job, you've never experienced love, and you previously said itt that my Sociology studies into gender "came from systematical vomit", so it's looking pretty likely that you have no basis for your claims of expertise in these areas and no academic or workplace training in any related area.

I have a wonderful girlfriend who is struggling in this cold world along with I. We speak and we stand for what we have diligently sought for to be the truth. We do not give in to our personal needs and experiences, and we pay great respect to the perception of this world. We would both bleed and die for this world, while I could tell you that you would not bleed or die for this world. You would only bleed and die for what comforts you. I don't need to be comforted by what I have already embraced in life. I will continue to stand and breathe for the simple voice that I am -- even if that means I will live in alone, and be conemned for not having a job because I choose to be patient with my intentions and see if there are in opportune moments before I sell my mind and body to a trade that is just as imperfect as we are.