Are American Indians "deviant"?

Post #350,586 by drook 11/14/11 3:58:52 PM Reply	Are American Indians "deviant"? After all, there are fewer of them than there are gay people, so by your definition they're "deviants". Or left-handed people. Their numbers are right about even with homosexuality. Is left-handedness now "deviant"? And by the way ... calling two specific people "deviants", then claiming you meant it in a neutral, clinical sense, is a flaming pile of horse shit. -- Drew
Post #350,599 by mmoffitt 11/14/11 4:40:51 PM Reply	It's called English. And I know how to use it.
Post #350,600 by crazy 11/14/11 4:48:13 PM Reply	Yup. Inflammatorily You sure do. Beep's right, even when he's sarcastic. *BOGGLE* What boggled you? Oh, them deviants are on the lose, best we lock down the wimmen and chillun before they infect them! There is no sexual "norm", only a spectrum, and you fall somewhere in it. So do they. Sexual norms are enforced by those not getting enough. And they want everyone else to suffer with them.
Post #350,602 by mmoffitt 11/14/11 4:53:19 PM Reply	Um, no. Is there some dispute that the overwhelming number of humans is heterosexual that I am unaware of? I don't give a flip what anyone does, but calling homosexual behavior normal behavior in humans is insane.
Post #350,606 by beepster 11/14/11 4:59:17 PM Reply	Re: Um, no. Its not the use of "normal" getting you in trouble. Its the use of "deviant" that is getting you in trouble. And not necessarily because its textbook incorrect...its the negative connotation it brings..as much as it would be if you used "abnormal" to counter "normal". Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #350,611 by mmoffitt 11/14/11 5:02:30 PM Reply	Forgive for being "textbook correct". :0)
Post #350,607 by drook 11/14/11 5:00:00 PM Reply	Yes, there is a dispute Sexual preference, as has already been stated in this thread, is a spectrum, not a binary setting. To say that "the overwhelming number of humans is heterosexual" requires that "is heterosexual" is binary: you are or you aren't. You're going to have to prove that premise before you can argue from it. -- Drew
Post #350,612 by mmoffitt 11/14/11 5:04:38 PM Reply	So, your conjecture is... That it is a minority of human beings who are "purely heterosexual" and have no proclivities for members of their own sex, barn animals, what have you. Is that it? That's a two-boggle for the price of one.
Post #350,616 by crazy 11/14/11 5:09:33 PM Reply	Enjoy http://books.google....rosexuals&f=false
Post #350,617 by drook 11/14/11 5:10:23 PM Reply	DING! You just put gender preference on the same plane as bestiality. Want to throw in pedophilia and go for the trifecta? -- Drew
Post #350,619 by mmoffitt 11/14/11 5:12:53 PM Reply	Consequence of the argument you made. YOUR claim was that I was wrong to submit that heterosexual behavior was the norm. The point I was making to YOU was that you could throw in every single other type of sexual behavior known among humans and heterosexual behavior WOULD STILL be present in greater numbers than all the rest. Making it the norm. HTH.
Post #350,621 by crazy 11/14/11 5:14:20 PM Reply	Here, a quiz for you http://absolutewrite...php/t-141929.html
Post #350,622 by drook 11/14/11 5:14:41 PM Reply	Still framing it as "behavior" ... still wrong -- Drew
Post #350,624 by mmoffitt 11/14/11 5:16:38 PM Reply	The existence of the species tells me I'm right.
Post #350,626 by crazy 11/14/11 5:20:06 PM Reply	Go read my book quote and you know you'd be wrong since heterosexuality has nothing to do with the furthering of the species.
Post #350,632 by beepster 11/14/11 5:39:41 PM Reply	Re: Go read my book quote Now you're "over-smarting"..same as that piece. At is most basic, sex is all about procreation. The problem is, it feels good ;-) Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #350,634 by crazy 11/14/11 5:58:52 PM Reply	Easy googleable targets get knocked down
Post #350,605 by beepster 11/14/11 4:57:20 PM Reply	Re: Yup. Inflammatorily Deviant is the wrong word, most definitely. However, in its most basic sense, "normal" is in play. However, mind you, seeing girls kiss, for me, is "normal". Hang out in Europe. Its not a gay thing, or a hetero thing...it just is. Not so much for guys, where its the handshake. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #350,608 by mmoffitt 11/14/11 5:00:45 PM Reply	B.S. How is "deviant" not appropriate? m.w.com: deviating especially from an accepted norm <deviant behavior>
Post #350,610 by beepster 11/14/11 5:02:07 PM Reply	see my other post. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #350,620 by drook 11/14/11 5:13:40 PM Reply	"accepted" You want "heterosexual" to be an absolute so that you can say the opposite is "deviant", yet your own chosen definition depends on "accepted". Accepted by whom? -- Drew
Post #350,670 by mmoffitt 11/15/11 8:31:18 AM Reply	The species. HTH.
Post #350,672 by drook 11/15/11 8:34:40 AM Reply	You asked it? -- Drew

Welcome to IWETHEY!