Yes, there is a dispute

IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO

1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

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

"Like any other normal couple"? - (mmoffitt) - (68) - Nov. 14, 2011, 01:46:13 PM EST

Yeah, why not? -NT - (drook) - (53) - Nov. 14, 2011, 02:05:09 PM EST

Normal Couple? - (mmoffitt) - (52) - Nov. 14, 2011, 03:00:50 PM EST

Re: Normal Couple? - (pwhysall) - (49) - Nov. 14, 2011, 03:04:57 PM EST

"Normal" couple != "Normal couple". - (mmoffitt) - (48) - Nov. 14, 2011, 03:25:33 PM EST

Gay is perfectly natural. - (pwhysall) - (21) - Nov. 14, 2011, 03:42:21 PM EST

Being Black or White is not behavior. - (mmoffitt) - (20) - Nov. 14, 2011, 04:51:09 PM EST

Two things - (drook) - (13) - Nov. 14, 2011, 04:57:11 PM EST

That's an argument I'm not making. - (mmoffitt) - (10) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:11:09 PM EST

So, mmoffitt... - (rcareaga) - (5) - Nov. 15, 2011, 01:25:58 AM EST

Assuming your facts. - (mmoffitt) - (4) - Nov. 15, 2011, 08:23:08 AM EST

and yet, there seems something else at work here - (rcareaga) - (3) - Nov. 15, 2011, 10:13:35 AM EST

There may be something else, I'll grant. - (mmoffitt) - (2) - Nov. 15, 2011, 11:25:46 AM EST

Nah. - (rcareaga) - (1) - Nov. 15, 2011, 03:37:57 PM EST

In general, I do find public displays inappropriate. - (mmoffitt) - Nov. 15, 2011, 03:53:03 PM EST

you have to get to 50% to be normal. - (boxley) - (3) - Nov. 15, 2011, 09:34:53 AM EST

Not what I said. And you know it. -NT - (mmoffitt) - (1) - Nov. 15, 2011, 10:05:24 AM EST

No, that's *exactly* what you said -NT - (drook) - Nov. 15, 2011, 10:28:40 AM EST

You deviate you -NT - (crazy) - Nov. 15, 2011, 12:09:28 PM EST

It used to be - (scoenye) - (1) - Nov. 14, 2011, 07:13:56 PM EST

Yup, my mother went to Catholic school - (drook) - Nov. 15, 2011, 08:02:13 AM EST

No, it's an insult when claimed something isn't normal - (crazy) - (2) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:00:49 PM EST

Re: No, it's an insult when claimed something isn't normal - (beepster) - (1) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:07:26 PM EST

Time and demographics - (crazy) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:15:53 PM EST

So... - (folkert) - Nov. 14, 2011, 10:51:05 PM EST

re: It's an abuse of the word normal - (altmann) - (1) - Nov. 16, 2011, 02:55:49 AM EST

:0) -NT - (mmoffitt) - Nov. 16, 2011, 08:03:29 AM EST

gasp - (beepster) - Nov. 14, 2011, 03:47:14 PM EST

Are American Indians "deviant"? - (drook) - (22) - Nov. 14, 2011, 03:58:52 PM EST

It's called English. And I know how to use it. -NT - (mmoffitt) - (21) - Nov. 14, 2011, 04:40:51 PM EST

Yup. Inflammatorily - (crazy) - (20) - Nov. 14, 2011, 04:48:13 PM EST

Um, no. - (mmoffitt) - (13) - Nov. 14, 2011, 04:53:19 PM EST

Re: Um, no. - (beepster) - (1) - Nov. 14, 2011, 04:59:17 PM EST

Forgive for being "textbook correct". :0) - (mmoffitt) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:02:30 PM EST

Yes, there is a dispute - (drook) - (10) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:00:00 PM EST

So, your conjecture is... - (mmoffitt) - (9) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:04:38 PM EST

Enjoy - (crazy) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:09:33 PM EST

DING! - (drook) - (7) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:10:23 PM EST

Consequence of the argument you made. - (mmoffitt) - (6) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:12:53 PM EST

Here, a quiz for you - (crazy) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:14:20 PM EST

Still framing it as "behavior" ... still wrong -NT - (drook) - (4) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:14:41 PM EST

The existence of the species tells me I'm right. -NT - (mmoffitt) - (3) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:16:38 PM EST

Go read my book quote - (crazy) - (2) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:20:06 PM EST

Re: Go read my book quote - (beepster) - (1) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:39:41 PM EST

Easy googleable targets get knocked down -NT - (crazy) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:58:52 PM EST

Re: Yup. Inflammatorily - (beepster) - (5) - Nov. 14, 2011, 04:57:20 PM EST

B.S. - (mmoffitt) - (4) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:00:45 PM EST

see my other post. -NT - (beepster) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:02:07 PM EST

"accepted" - (drook) - (2) - Nov. 14, 2011, 05:13:40 PM EST

The species. HTH. -NT - (mmoffitt) - (1) - Nov. 15, 2011, 08:31:18 AM EST

You asked it? -NT - (drook) - Nov. 15, 2011, 08:34:40 AM EST

You're applying statistical definitions... - (static) - Nov. 14, 2011, 06:59:08 PM EST

yes normal - (boxley) - Nov. 14, 2011, 09:08:38 PM EST

Human sexuality is powerful and erratic. - (Andrew Grygus) - (1) - Nov. 15, 2011, 01:24:25 AM EST

There's a reason they call it "vanilla". - (static) - Nov. 15, 2011, 04:51:15 AM EST

It really depends on how you read that, doesn't it? - (Another Scott) - (2) - Nov. 14, 2011, 08:03:54 PM EST

It's much more fun to use technically accurate, loaded words - (mmoffitt) - (1) - Nov. 15, 2011, 08:29:57 AM EST

Project much? -NT - (drook) - Nov. 15, 2011, 08:35:18 AM EST

Took a day, but I figured out the problem - (drook) - (10) - Nov. 15, 2011, 09:17:18 PM EST

no boggle zone? cmon, mikey can boggle and we can educate - (boxley) - (1) - Nov. 15, 2011, 09:25:05 PM EST

Hmmmmm. -NT - (mmoffitt) - Nov. 16, 2011, 08:05:20 AM EST

I thought it was just a boring problem of definition. -NT - (static) - Nov. 15, 2011, 09:45:59 PM EST

wrong on one count - (beepster) - (2) - Nov. 15, 2011, 11:13:39 PM EST

Which SW has already admitted to being wrong about - (crazy) - (1) - Nov. 16, 2011, 05:29:24 AM EST

right, wrong dont matter - (beepster) - Nov. 16, 2011, 05:57:54 AM EST

I took a few days, too. - (mmoffitt) - (3) - Nov. 17, 2011, 10:40:20 AM EST

This is why scientists can't do politics - (drook) - (2) - Nov. 17, 2011, 10:03:13 AM EST

Right - that's the real problem. - (mmoffitt) - Nov. 17, 2011, 10:15:14 AM EST

Re: This is why scientists can't do politics - (pwhysall) - Nov. 17, 2011, 10:22:08 AM EST

When you make someone eat shit, feed it to them with the right fork.
89 ms