I am on more then 1 forum active and each forum is really different...

Some other forum there are almost only girls and most of them are bi-sexual or gay..this gives (sometimes) strange talk about sex and things like that...

I know we all here for the games but i was just wondering what the main sexuality on this forum is...

So when you feel free to say, do it here :ok:

While this poll may prove interesting I'm pretty sure the admins will not allow you to talk about sex on the main forum.

Perhaps on an hidden forum? (hint, hint ;))

Well if this topic should stay it should be in the main forum. Otherwise you could only get the responce of some people, not the majority of the members.

But why should that matter anyway?

Treat everybody with equal respect, and if you talk about sex, then use your own experiance (or feelings) and be honest. If someone dislikes you for what you are - to hell with them.

And one more thing:
If you're looking for the responce about emotions - it doesn't matter - love is love.
If you're looking for tips on how to get laid - it doesn't matter - sex is sex.

So it's only your attitude that may or may not stand in your way.

I actually considered making this topic myself, but I didn't want to offend anybody or get a warning or something from the admins...I guess from now on I will be absolutely fearless and do what ever I want! WAHAHAHAHAHAHA! :butcher: :sniper:

Um, nice pol? LOL

Before anyone asks, I didn't choose bi-sexual. I chose straight. No really, I am straight. :blink:

:evil: I guess wormpaul is looking for some eligible partners which share his same love for same sex if u want there are speciliased forums for that :evil:
Just kidding i know that u are the first one to vote straight!

Are you sure you're being straight with us?

So far in my life i`m still straight...

So till the moment come that it changed i will vote for straight :ok:

Are you sure you're being straight with us? [/b][/quote]
I'm sure. I'm gonna stay that way too.

No, don't misunderstand me... This poll is fine. Talking about sex tough would not fit here because it's obvious there is so many underage people who could read it. Don't forget this board is rated General, not 13+ or something like that.

What I said about an hidden forum would be like the hidden translation forum on which only a selected few have access. Once someone can prove he's 18+ then we can add him/her to the forum and it would be allowed to talk about 18+ stuff there.

I think it could be an option if admins agree to it.

Or maybe 16+ :whistle: ...

Yes..

Very well eagle of fire..

That`s why i kept it clean as possible...

When i start here to talk about sex (possible topic: When was the last time you did it??) would make me Public Enemy nr.1

So just keep it clean and so far: Most people on this forum are straight..

Is there any possible link between old games and being straight?? (and again...only clean and normal things plz)

period when old games were new: less people were gay

current period with new "3d" games, etc.: more people gay

ergo: New games make you catch gay! ;)

You can discuss sexual orientation here if you want. You cannot discriminate on the forum obviously but a discussion such as this is okay.

I voted straight, because thats the truth for me :)

I think as a majority, guys don't understand why one guy would want to have sex with another, I know I dont understand it, I have nothing against gay people, I know some gay people, I just dont understand why they would want to do such a thing.

exactly! See, in my eyes, girl's are soft, and they smell good, and they are extremely pretty and sweet smooth and everything about them is great (most of the time.) Guys are hairy, and coarse and rough, and they smell...I just don't get it. :eeeeeh:

For what it's worth, I don't really understand what straight guys see in women. :) I don't think it's something you can explain in any sort of logical way -- it's just what feels right.

I'm bisexual.

@Reamus: You're right in a way.. Men can be hairy, smelly, rough and whatnot, but hey, they can also be sexy as hell ;) But it's not just the looks that matter :whistle:
Girls... Girls are lovely. But they can be needy, controll-freaks, needy, needy, controlling and needy.
;)

Ah yes, I can only assume you are reffering to those such as myself :ok: I mean, who can resist me in a sexy four button suit and black mock turtleneck (from Banana Republic I might add) while I serenade you on guitar and sing beautiful french love songs to you? :D From my experiences on Friday, no one (it's gotta be my red hair, I swear)

Ah yes, I can only assume you are reffering to those such as myself :ok: I mean, who can resist me in a sexy four button suit and black mock turtleneck (from Banana Republic I might add) while I serenade you on guitar and sing beautiful french love songs to you? :D From my experiences on Friday, no one (it's gotta be my red hair, I swear) [/b][/quote]
l o l!

But.. well.. uhm...
I'm taken
:max:

No comment :whistle:

l o l!

But.. well.. uhm...
I'm taken
:max:

No comment :whistle: [/b][/quote]
as am I...apparently my singing and dressing well attracts girl three years older than myself as well...<shrug> I'm fine with her :ok:

Continuing on from what I said earlier. I think also most staright guys can accept this and understand why a chick would want to have sex with another, cause in most cases they are atracted to them for the same reasons we are.

Also from what I said earlier it seems to be the opposite for females, well at least for the ones my age, if I were to claim a female was a lesbian, in most cases they wouldn't take offense (except one I know and I found out the hard way), but if you claimed a guy was gay, you can be certain he would take offence to it, females seem to be able to accept lesbianism (is that a word?). I guess females are more open minded then guys. But I'm quite happy being close minded.

As am I! I have nothing against gays...and I would like to keep it that way.

Thx Picard.. :ok:

And about the fact what why guys can like other guys...(same for girls..)

I think there isnt much difference between feelings (doesnt matter for wich opposite) as long as it feels right..

Only some things wouldnt fit in my mind...the first time sex with another guy must be really strange..

For the rest...just as normal as with other sex..

By reading these posts, it seems you people seek out a partner for sex. :huh:

I am almost ashamed of telling you all this... but...


I seek a girlfriend for companionship.
(sorry)
:tomato:

TOM:

Me too

Puffin:

You r bi-.... :blink
never figured it
oh, well, neat

I just want a girl thats needy. LOL



Hope I'm not off topic here.

And what will you do then if you will not be able to satisfy her - a needy girl can really be needy :sneaky:

@Tom - You look handsome, you are straight, you a medicine student - which cannot be a disadvantage with girls - so it is my opinion that at this time in your life you want to be alone, because you could have gotten a girlfriend by now if you wanted to :whistle: [Seb greets you all very warmly :butcher: ]

Unless he becomes a gynecologist.

Unless he becomes a gynecologist. [/b][/quote]
:eeeeeh: From what i know girls just love gynecologists coz they know there way around if u know what i mean!!
I just quit med and i am doing pharmacy how can you stay in med school its really TOO long and hard !!
ur either a genius or u just dont sleep!

Be careful with such statemants, it's not an x-rated forum :bleh:

Rainwife

She better not need that too much.


Xcom:

Long and hard. LOL What pills are you taking for that effect to happen all the time???
:bleh:
BTW you want a girl who wants you to know her/ your way around
you shouldn't say those things
kids can read this :bleh:

You know, looking at this topic I was a little worried at first because most places it would turn into a flamefest. I was incredibly relieved to see that all of you are really quite mature with it. It makes me love being around here that much more. :)

And to answer the question, I'm a lesbian.

@ xcom freak: But see, the guy knows his way around a little too well then, and then in the middle of "the deed" they freak out, run away, and start throwing up because they know something others do not...and they have to look at a lot of sick...girls...

What!!! i meant that they work with a lot of women and so they
have experience in how to smooth talk women :angel:

I'm personally straight, but I don't think it's wrong to be otherwise.

Sometimes, I consider lesbianism, but only because I can't find a guy who has the same ideals as me. It's much easier to find in women. :D :angel:

The sex issue really has nothing to do with it for me.

But, I have to be true to my heart, and I'm not attracted to females. I think maybe the mystery of the male mind is what attracts me, because there's no physicality that makes me like someone. I've liked fat, thin, short, tall, blonde, brunette, whatever physical appearance the particular mind belongs to. But when I am attracted, I just end up disappointed by how my love isn't returned the same way.

Met wrong ones? :sneaky:
I'm also straight, but I don't really have anything against those who are not. Let them have their own life, people were always different...

*Funny mode on*
You want flaming? http://www.abandonia.com/~sebatianos/icon_hang.gif :butcher: :Titan: :rifle: :sniper: :twisted:
You calling me mature??? :ranting: :pissed: :SPAM:
*Trying to be funny mode off*

OK, just this one last :ot: thought from me...
I'm really happy people here are mature (and they proved it in many other topics), not to mention, that mods/admins do a great job and would respond in an instant if something went out of hand (they are really againt flaming).

Back to the thread!

I don't care if people are gay, but I can't understand how can a man find women unattractive...( maybe i'll understand it one day but now I am in an stage of life filled with ermmm you know... :drool: )

A: You're her gynecologist?
B: Yes, I am. Is that strange?
A: It's like reading a book when you already know the ending.

LOL

@FreeFreddy: Definitely! Just because someone has a beautiful mind doesn't necessarily mean they also have a beautiful soul :angel:

And the soul is much harder to see until it's too late. :(

That's why it always needs some time before coming together. To learn more of the one you like, and to avoid wrong decisions...

@Tulac: Yuk - Stop drulling you slimmy slimmy boy! :D

I too have nothing against people who do it with their own sex, as long as both (all of them :sneaky: ) are willing to do it :ok:

Relationships with either gender can definately be a hard thing. I've been through both and just found that being with women felt right.

The hugest problem with it though is that women alone are rather emotional creatures, so putting two into a relationship can make things rather crazy at times. I've been with my lady for four years now and though it's been wonderful, when we get into fights they usually end up being bigger than they need to be simply because of our emotional reactions. :P

Well, I would believe that, but it must be so much nicer then when you make up :ok: Besides, if you really want to make it, there is never and will never be an easy way to do it!

Well, I'm straight, but I have nothing against gay guys. They usually have a good sense for style and know how to make party. :)

There is so much truth there. When I was younger I thought a good relationship was one without problems. Now that I'm twenty and can clearly look at things I realize how wrong I was there. A relationship without problems isn't a very close one. There will always be arguements and misunderstandings, it's how you end/clean up after them that is what counts.

Personally I just don't understand how people can throw the term love around in the way they do. I remember back in high school these girls would be with a certain guy one week and they were "totally in love" and yet she'd be dating an entirely new guy the next week. :blink: I guess words just mean more to me than they do with other people.

Well, I'm straight, but frankly, if someone can find a relationship with another that satisfies both, then it's all good. I'm not sure if issues of sexuality mellow with age, but I'm thirty, unmarried, unattached, unloved and unsurprised, and don't really mind how someone else finds happiness.

I am, however, suspicious of people who wear their sexuality as a badge. Couple of years ago, I worked security at a student union where there is a vibrant gay and lesbian community. Actually, vibrant isn't quite the right word - militaristic might be better. Again, I'll just stress that I take no issue with anyone's sexual preference, but i do take issue at having my own tastes ridiculed - it's like a sort of reverse-snobbery. I don't think sexuality defines a person, and I don't think it should. As a case-in-point, at the university, I suggested starting a 'straight' club, and was immediately hammered with complaints from the gay-and-lesbian society, because obviously I must be homophobic.

Obviously I'm not - but I do think that if one's sexuality is used to bludgeon a lifestyle onto other people, one can't then claim the moral highground when bludgeoned back. At least, that's my opinion.

@Mardi - I know what you are saying, but that is the way things are. It seems that there will always be a group of people that will feel discriminated or attakced, so they will attack first.
I guess reversed discrimination is understandable, but only makes things worst. One should be proud of what one is, and defend it, but not attack others, just because they are different in their eyes.

If everyone would understand that, the world would be a much better place to live...

Yeah, I agree with you. At the same time, I'm not sure I understand the "be proud of what you are" logic. I can't say I'm proud to be straight, anymore than I'm proud to have blue eyes, or proud to have my own teeth, or proud to have certain character traits like punctuality. It's simply how I'm wired, and for all I know, that may be subject to change - I simply might have not met the right guy.

Having said that, as a thirty year old bachelor, my opinions on relationships and sexuality are quite possibly not the best informed in the world. :D Alas, they're the only one's I've got.

Better than knowing too much of it. Many people tend today to spend too many thoughts only on that, causing them to suffer in simply loving. <_<

I think it was meant as - respect your self (sort of live and let live statemant). :ok:

Oh right... I see what you mean. I really got to stop taking things literally.

I feel kinda stupid now.

Um...

Think i'll just sit very still and quiet and hope no-one notices me. :whistle:

No need for that, if you have an opinion (and from what I read so far your opinions are reasonable, well argumented - not to mention I kindda share your views) you are always welcome to express it. :ok:

BTW - Rainwife says Hi to you Mardi!

Hetero female here.

Gay male here.

im straight... but i dont have any problems against gays or lesbians ..... i have some friends wich are currently gays ........ i don't have problems against homosexuals .... unless they mess with me....




*EDIT: some misstyping errors.... i'm very bad writting :P

I have nothing against gays...and I want to keep it that way...

I already said that though, didn't I? I had a friend who I knew was gay, but we were still friends. Until he was at this party and he got really really drunk and got it on with two other guys in the bathroom, then called my friend and I to join in with him "in the action." Now seeing him is very awkward...I don't like it when guys come on to me :blink: :eeeeeh:

If you don't like it when guys come onto you, then you're a homophobe. Simple. You can claim all you want that you have gay friends, but if you're uncomfortable with a member of the same sex being attracted to you, then you're a homophobe.

Way I see it, all love is good love.

What about dendrophilia?

Or pedophilia?

Or necrophilia?

Still good love?

I, for one, would be incredibly uncomfortable if a corpse was hitting on me...

It's okay to be uncomfortable with something. It's just a personal preference.

If it's love, yes.

If it's lust, then... well, as long as SOMEONE had a good time, yeah.

By that logic, it sounds like rape would be okay with you.

Just a thought ;)

Ok, addendum: AS LONG AS NOBODY GETS HURT

Unless they like it that way.

Or unless they really, really deserve it.

When someone is made uncomfortable by someone else, it's a form of hurt.

Mental anguish to a lesser degree?

Anyway, that's my point. It's not homophobic to not want someone of your sex to hit on you. It's just preference.

:D

Mental anguish is bullshit, anyway.

But it's my opinion against yours, and you're not gonna be changing my opinion any time soon.

I wasn't trying. I was just offering my own as another option, and using your words to help my case.

You hate me, don't you? ;)

If this were real life, maybe.

Seeing as how this is a forum, no. In fact, you're articulate, intelligent, and have decent ideals.

And besides, deep down, sex is sex, sex is enjoyable, and no matter how you get it, you'll eventually like it.

Good, I think the same of you. That's why I like this place.

I'm not big on the sex. Connecting bodies is no huge feat. Connecting hearts is a near impossibility, and the rewards are much greater.

straight here. i don't hate homosexuals but i don't want any involvement in the proceedings either.

I knew Mentor's posts were going to be interesting to read. LOL

But I agree with Reamus and Taikara on this one.

Depends on your outlook on life. For one, except for mind-altering chemicals, sex is one of the only ways to release certain endorphins in the brain which cause pleasure.

Love is a great thing, but it's also overrated. Decent analogy: Love may make you happy, but love won't pay the bills, put a roof over your head, and keep you fed.

Sex can.

Please don't tell you're talking about prostitution.

Not JUST prostitution, no. Look at the trophy wives of the world, or the women who do porn. The pretty muchsurvive because they're good in bed.

Prostitution is just like drugs: if we would just legalize it and have the government regulate it, it would be a great thing. But that'll never happen because people put personal morality before the big picture.

Isn't the most basic form of morality simply the desire not to hurt others?

These things are not legalized because they would hurt others in some form or another.

No, the most basic form of morality is the desire to not be hurt yourself.

Besides, who has the right to tell me, or anyone else, how I should or should not live my life?

If someone wants to slowly kill themself by any means, might as well tax the muck out of it and give them as enjoyable an experience as possible. Look at the cigarette industry, same concept, same idea, but cigarettes are ok while black tar heroin isn't.

For the record, I don't actually do drugs, or drink for that matter, I just don't see why anyone should tell someone else that THEY shouldn't, or make it so they can't legally.

I have done drugs, and they do hurt the person who does them.

As for morality being a desire not to be hurt yourself, that would make murder, rape, theft, and anything that might be beneficial (and not hurtful) to yourself moral.

Which doesn't make any sense.

Anything can be twisted into being a moral act. Especially since morals are the most opinionated and subjective/objective concepts the human mind can come up with.

Murder: They deserved it, therefor it was ok

Rape: She secretly enjoyed it, therefor it was ok

Theft: They didn't need it, therefor it was ok

I'm not saying it's right OR wrong, just that morality has nothing to do with anything but yourself. Your morals tell you that it's about not hurting others, if that's what they do. My morals tell me it's about not hurting me.

I never said that drugs don't hurt someone. What I'm saying is that if they're hell-bent on doing it anyway, might as well let the government make some money off of the deal. I've done drugs too, I just stopped because I realized that they really weren't all they're cracked up to be, especially after the episode with the radio antenne... *shudder*

Laws are created to protect individuals not only from others, but also from themselves. We give consequences to acts that are not beneficial to a person, such as going over speed limits, because a person could hurt themselves by doing them. In such a way, we are giving more weight to decisions that can cause people to hurt themselves and others.

The law is not meant so much to prevent action, but to make people stop and think about what they are doing. Any action that can hurt someone should hold consequences. Nobody is saying that you can't do something. They're just saying there will be tangible penalties for doing it.

Speed limit laws are to avoid large-scale catastrophe, not to protect one idiot who wants to drive 150 down the freeway.

And, sadly, the fact that people are still doing things that are against the law shows that the "gravity/weight" part isn't working.

By putting a penalty to an act, you ARE saying that you can't do it. Or at least "do it and we'll *meep* your behind up." which is the same damn thing.

While this discussion is probably interresting for people who care about it. It's off topic and turning into a private discussion.

We have a pm system for that.

Damn I was hoping it would be a while till an Admin came along and said that. It is a very interesting conversation.

Killjoy.

Fine. I'm omni-sexual. I'll have sex with anything on two to four legs. Six legs and over are usually too small.

Is that off-topic enough for you, my leader? (literal translation of the forbidden phrase)

Sorry, Data!

@Mentor: I knew there was something odd about you... :whistle:

But since I'm not a omni(philio)phobe, I'll let it pass ;)

Hey, I clicked the Straight Radio but the Lesbian Radio got clicked, how is that? :D

By the way, I sometime do like the Ringling Brothers Barnum and Bailey... :D :D

hey i think that beeing unconfortable when a guy try to get on you does not turn you into a homophobic..... i mean... if you like girls, and suddenly a guy try to kiss you, you WILL fell uncomfortable ... it's normal... if what you feel is anger and you feel that you wanna smash that guy on the face, that's homophobic......
i mean that's it's normal to be uncomfortable because it's a surprising situation in wich you don't know what to do (spacially if that guy is your friend)
and to feel uncomfortable with your friend it's because you don't wanna follow his game AND you don't wanna hurt him... so when you don't know what to do, you WILL fell uncomfortable... if you don't feel uncomfortable, then you are probably homo or bisexual
if you feel uncomfortable, then you are heterosexual
if you feel anger and don't care abou what the other feel... then you are a homophobic
That's my point of view

My sexuality is my own buissness.

My first girlfriend was a lesbian and i don´t care about the persons sexuality

it is the person i care about, not the sexuality.

Other than that i like gay, bi, transexual people and hermaphrodites.

(i don´t mind the sexuality of people)

peace.

WolverineDK

Mmmmm... chicks with *****...

Best of BOTH worlds.

one of my dearest friends is a transexual and i care deeply about her.

post or pre-op?

Trannies aren't technically chicks with *****. They're just men or women with gender issues.

she is born with the feeling of being born as a female in a male body

and she has not yet had her operation.

I know this is OT, but directed @ Mentor: Legalizing drugs and stuff would be an interesting idea...but then again, that's what China tried to do and that brought about the Opium Wars.

@ Wolverine: Don't they most of the time do surgery when they are a child? How old is this friend of yours, if I may ask? Why has she waited so long?

Also @ Mentor: Were you kidding about the four legs, or no? Just curious.

Also, just because I was extremely uncomfortable because my friend asked me to go into a 69 position, I do not believe that makes me a homophobe. In my eyes, a homophobe is one that publically makes known that he or she hates gays, and will not even be in the same room as them. But just because I had no desire to touch another guys penis, I do not see how that makes me a homophobe. I work in Musical Theatre and Opera...almost all of the people in my line of work are gay in some form or another.

Hah! If only that stereotype held true more often... <_<

<!--QuoteBegin-ReamusLQ@Feb 15 2005, 06:55 PM
Also, just because I was extremely uncomfortable because my friend asked me to go into a 69 position, I do not believe that makes me a homophobe.[/quote]
It doesn't. I don't understand why it's awkward seeing him now though.

Well, it is always awkard for a person to be around a person who wanted something from you, but you didn't want to do or have anything with that person. Especially if the things that took place were not discussed about or solved later.
In my opinion Reamus is not a homophob - and neither am I.
When I was in The States, I met a female who was born with the male organ (you do know what I mean, don't you :whistle: ) and she was really nice and friendly to us.

Its a pity, this forum is infested with straight guys and gals. :tomato:

Wow! She must be enjoying two movies with one ticket, huh?

ReamusLQ:

a transexual is born either as a female or male, and no you don´t operate on children in Denmark when we are talking about sexchange

and biological speaking she is still a he , but as i said for me it does not matter for me she will always be a she and have always been a she.

and it is a damn hard and long way of getting that operation in Denmark (DK is in scandinavia)

i did not say i was bi or straight , just that it was my own buissness and don´t worry you will meet some one :-)

Now don't take that in any way as an offense, but try to understand:
Can two males produce a child through mutual sex? Can two females success in that, either? No, they can't. It was predetermined by nature that a man and a woman have sex and get child(ren). Anything that's going off that way isn't serving any purpose. Wouldn't it be quite logical, that gays and lesbians are people with wrong genetical information and are allowed to exist only because our comfortable life in the cities allows that? Just think what would happen with all that people who aren't able to reproduce themselves, should some special circumstances appear? Like some natural catastrophe, that would wipe off more than half of an earth' population, for example. Then there would be only people needed, who prefer opposite gender, and those who like their own gender, wouldn't live for long.
As a result of this long explainment you can see my opinion of such people. I don't hate them and don't either intend to blame them for what they are, I simply don't care about them. But I see them as non-normal functioning people, and as such, I wouldn't like to have someone lesbian or gay as a friend. Not that I ever had one like that...
Like I said before, no offense. ;)

There's more to life than breeding. Would you feel the same way about someone who's infertile? Or a couple who chooses not to have children? Or if a gay person gets married and has kids just for appearances but then has same-sex affairs on the side, is that somehow a better thing? I think it's possible to provide a valuable contribution to society without necessarily increasing the population.

True that sex was here only to produce new creatures, but nowadays sex has become such a big deal. If someone wants to have it, then go ahead. To me sex is still something very personal, like giving myself completely to the other person and yes, not only to have children.
@Freddy - When it comes down to having children. Two lesbians can have children - either they or one of them has a one night stander or females can get artificually pregnant. For males, that is an interly different story - they do not have that abbility. So, let's presume that a woman was straight. She was married, had a child or children, her husband left her and later in her life, she found a female friend and they were living together. Would you take the children away from their mother, just because she has found love in someone of her own gender? I wouldn't.
It is also true that people who are gay still got married with the opposite gender just because of the society, but lived a double life., so the marriage was only a pretence.

I know what you mean, there is many more cases behind that than what I said above. And I agree, too. But, you know, I feel somehow that gays or lesbians are not right. I think it's the inner voice. And I prefer to listen to it rather than ignore it. ;)
Couples that prefer not to have children is something different. They are still "normal", if a couple consists of a man and a woman. It isn't the need to increase the population. Rather the love for the same gender.

I really feel I have to say this...

Nature is a complex thing. Many animals require sex in order to reproduce. But there is no way in the nature to force animals (and I count humans in this category as well) to have sex. So there was this urge, this need to have sex. Animals do it, because they get an orgasm! Even animals masturbate (and that's an orgasm that isn't producing children either - so no better/worse then sex with contraception, or sex among homosexuals). But the main goal of this urge is to have an intercourse (and as many times as possible, so as many offspring would be born).

But humans have become unnatural. Unlike other animals, humans started thinking and found out that SEX has the side effect - children, so the price for the pleasure of sex would be children! People are a specie that learned to control this (by abortion, contraception and homosexuality - just look at the ancient Greece).

But then again, humans are unnatural anyway!

Is it natural, to move your fingers on a small plastic thing and moments after someone accross the world will know your thoughts???

No, the natural communication would be something like this - make a noise and creatures that are in your near and able to hear the noise would have the chance to understand you - or not.

People have evolved from being animals, forced to do things simply because they have natural urges. And that goes in every way. So please, don't use nature as an argument against homosexuality. People are so unnatural in every single thing, that if you really wanted to become natural (but animals can be homosexual too) you can stop using your clothes, stop cooking food, stop heating your self up with fire,... In fact, you can just go at the zoo and you'll see how you'd live if you were a natural ANIMAL (which humans aren't any more).

Actually, I remember reading that aside from Humans, Dolphins are the only other animals that have sex for the pleasure and fun of it. Other than that, the animals do it strictly to spread their seed.

Sorr to say that, but dogs, bucks and cats masturbate... That's not meant for reproduction. True, they aren't haveing sex, but then again, they are acheiving orgasms. But please explain, how can dolphins have sex for fun? I hear that too, but what, do they stop before they reach the peak or what? Otherwise they would impregnate the f-male.
Oh and I've seen male dogs humping each other (that's not for reproduction either).

Male dogs humping eachother...well, dogs also hump chair legs because they are so horny. How do these animals masturbate? I thought they do it just to get into the mood/heat. It's a lot easier to nail the girl when you're already hard, than having to pin her down and wait for it :sneaky:

Dammm....

All spamming here ???? :wall:

Gee, so many things I never wanted to know that I do know now.
Alright, my opinion.
#1:I am not gay, or bi-sexual.
#2:I do not hate gays , lesbians, or bi-sexual.
#3:I feel it is wrong to hate someone just because of their desicions and lifestyle.
#4:I have had friends who r gay or bi and the way they have sex doesn't make me go, oh, no run, I have nothing against them just because of that.
#5:So, in short, gays and bi-sexuals aren't alien creatures or beasts, they are regular human beings trying to live their life the way they want.

EDIT: I've seen male dogs doing that too. I think Seb is right about that.

Even if I wanted to find a girl, I have never had the time. I am constantly moving around the world.

Yes, I have choses to remain single, because I don't have the heart to leave a girl behind. (Which is what would happen to any girl I would've found). I can't bare to witness the below scenario happen to a girl I love, and so I am single.


:Tom: Hey, foxy lady, you lookin' awesome. Wanna hang?
:w00t: Oh Tom, you manly stud, yes... yes... YES!
:Tom: Cool, baby..

*Music starts playing (Marvin Gaye - Let's get it on)*

:Tom: These last two weeks were fun. Now I am moving to Trondheim. Cya.
:blink: But... but... why?
:Tom: I am accepted into a school there. Don't worry. I'll be back in 6 months. Take care.
:eeeeeh: That blows!

*Music starts playing (Marvin Gaye - Sexual Healing)*

:Tom: Yo, girl! I'm back!
:w00t: Wheee!
:Tom: Now let's make the best of it. We have 1 week, then I move to Svalbard for a year, and after that I enroll in the military (up north... also a year). Oh yeah, and then I am moving to Spain to study medicine... and after that I'll probably live in Polland for.. oh... six years. See you later!
:cry: Oh poor me... left all alone...

*Music starts plarts playing (R.E.M. - Everybody hurts)*

@Tom:

Buahahaha.

Healthy imagination you've got there.

Did you ever think that if someone loved you, they might want to go with you? Or wait for you?

Something tells me that despite all the moving, if you found someone you loved, you'd love them no matter where you were.

And after all...

You do have friends. If you move, you don't see them, but you still consider them friends, right? Not to mention Abandonia....

Anyway, the point is... love is a deeper kind of friendship. It doesn't stop just because you don't see the person.

Wow, this topic has evolved quite fast :blink:

I'd write my whole bunch of opinions, but I have to say they're pretty much the same as Sebatianos (I often happen to agree with him). I don't think lesbians or gays are something not right. Love within the same sex is a thousand-years-old thing.

Applauses to Tom - his post is awesome
:kosta:

What a great post TOM!!! :ok:

Maybe you can have a girl in each country that you are living... :whistle:

@Tom - There was no mentioning of you comming to Slovenija?! :angry:
But I can understand Tai's opinion also, although I was in a long distance relationship (long - Hmm, that is relative) and it didn't turn out. And I do understand Tom that if he travells, he doesn't know what expects him, so he doesn't want to tie to anyone...

@Void -Hmmm, I agree with you about you agreeing with Seb - If you know what I mean :whistle: :ok:

Just a case of a mistake in a stimulation. When a dog sees a female dog, and certain circumstances are met (time of the year, perhaps attractive object etc.), it feels the urge to do what is "programmed" in them to do in that case. Certain objects have similar effect on their stimulation. Some have smaller effect, and some are even more attractive than a female dog, as funny as that might sound. This is actually the basics of the science of the behavior of the animals, so no need to think that animals "masturbate". To say that is the same as to say that animals can think, play music for pleasure and build houses. ;)

So is that a genetic mistake in dogs???
If an animal should get aroused in order to have sex - in order to reproduce - then there should be nothing more attractive then a female of the species! But obviously this is not the case with dogs (and I dare to say other animals too). So why are you saying that homosexuality should be a genetical mistake?
That was your statement from before, that I was trying to prove wrong.

I think it's just a matter of interpreting the facts.

And as for saying that dogs can't build houses, play music,...
That's my point. Humans were animals at one point, but they got above it. We aren't those animals any more. So why should we obey the "programme" of nature? Sex has become a pleasurable activity - and not a way of reproducing.
If you look at all the people having sex (no mater if in a homosexual, heterosexual relationship or an orgy - I don't even want to go into animal abuse that's sex too,) and the amount of children being born, you'll see that the primary function of sex has become - pleasure. That already changed the nature of sex. So for me, there's no difference if two guys do it, or if two girls do it, or if a guy and a girl do it (with contraception). It's all a pleasurable activity that won't produce children. The difference is only superficial.

My aunt used to own a rooster that thought she was his mate, and he would hiss and try to scare away my uncle, and also hump my aunts leg...is his rooster into beastiality/masturbation/just having a good time? He refused to mate with any hen except my aunt.

Would you say that a man would find another man more attractive than a woman? Because it would be quite obvious that a woman is always more attractive than a man, in aesthetical case. In the case of dogs it might be a leg of a human that's shaking and attracts the dog better than a female dog because its attraction works stronger on the dog. But males are less attractive than women, I dare to say? So why are some men more attracted to other men rather than to women? :eeeeeh:

According to Darwin, homosexuality (and actually any sexual attraction to anything but the opposite sex of your species), is a genetic mistake.

Except in the case of some creatures that can asexually reproduce, such as bacteria, or reproduce hermaphroditically, such as worms.

After all, if you don't reproduce, you can't pass on your genes, which leads to extinction of those certain genotypes.

Humans are more than just the sum of our DNA, though. We are something of an incredible anomoly. We can surpass our genetic programming through science, which allows us to reproduce and pass on DNA even if we aren't attracted to the "correct" gender for reproduction, through sperm/egg donation and implantation techniques.

Technically, humans have the ability to be completely above their primordial animalistic roots and give up sex altogether.

But if you look at the rest of the animal kingdom, the Male's are naturally more "beautiful" than the females. Male cardinals have bright red heads, male peacocks have the brilliant plumage, male lions have the mane, male tigers have the darker and broader stripes, roosters have their ***** comb, almost all the bird males have the more vibrant plumage, while the females are more plain. The reason being, is the males have a harder competition for females, so they must look more impressive to win over the mate.
However, even though males, on the majority, are naturally more "beautiful" than females, you never find a homosexual rooster, or bull, or gorilla. I think homosexuality is something humans have created as a society.

In that case, people would become more and more degenerated with time. By reproducing a DNA-code it starts to contain less information with every new reproduction. And beside of that, clones that look all the same are pretty depressive - no differences anymore, no beauty in its sense.
In case of sperm donations, there's a saying: the more a man loves his woman, the healthier and stronger the child would be. And in case of donations, would a man be really that excited? Improbably. And the people born from a donated sperma will start to degenerate...

Uhh?

Excitement during sex has nothing to do with the health of a child. It doesn't make DNA stronger. DNA is just DNA. In meiosis, your DNA breaks into two halves to create zygotes which can then be joined with a complimentary zygote from the opposite sex.

It's sort of "the luck of the draw," if you will.

And I wasn't speaking of cloning, just reproductive science. Cloning is another story altogether.

Having sex, from a biological standpoint, is nothing more than a transfer system for DNA.

Agreed there. And yes, animals' males are more attractive. But, the more intelligence a species has, the more attractive you have to be. In case of humans, being VERY intelligent as they are, the women as men will have to be more beautiful to be attractive. And that's where men come shorter. At least those who live in the cities, living a life in comfort and no physical and psychical challenges which is not necessary causing them to look better. Same for women, though.
Aesthetically a woman is usually more beautiful than a man. Ask any artist and he'll say you the same. See the sculptures and portraits of the past. Except of the greeks, who also created statues of strong men, other cultures, like that in India, made art with women. There were examples of art with men, also, but rarely and not really connected to beauty but instead to praise a leader and such. ;)

It has something to do with that. ;)
During sex, the more a male enjoys it, the more healthy his spermes are. And as such, the more healthy the child, if one will be produced after, will be. I think it's even proven scientifically.

<pats self> ahhhhh...Good, HEALTHY Sperm. Show me a girl, and my boys are suddenly armed with Bazookas and on steroids :bleh: :ok:

Perhaps his sperm is healthier, but the sperm is simply the vehicle in the transport system. It doesn't effect DNA. DNA is something like binary, it's either a yes or a no.

More passion might lead to greater chance of reproduction, but it doesn't lead to greater chance of healthy DNA in a child.

Not that simply. She will have to be attractive enough, so you'll have more enjoyenment of sex. ;)
And if she's not that attractive, you don't feel that strong, also.

Ok, let's say it depends on the woman if the child will be healthier or weaker. But then again, that would depend on her love on the man. If their love is strong and they are happy with their family life, there's a better chance for a healthy child than if the man would beat the woman up and like. And the key is again the attractive look of the man. ;)

Ahh, but that is social conditioning and has nothing to do with genetics. :whistle:

The feelings affect the genetical outcome, without the feelings the result isn't that good. After all, the woman hates her man, the woman doesn't love her child from him, at least not as strong as she would in other case (what woman could resist loving her child, anyway). And when a woman becomes pregnant with a child, her feelings for her man affect the child's growth during it's time inside. She doesn't know her child yet, after all.

Well just to show you how untrue your statemant is - if there would be no attractive men and women would be so attractive ALL WOMEN WOULD BECOME LESBIANS, which would mean the human race would die out a long time ago!

@taikara: According to Darwin?
No, I already explained that. Sex in nature is ment for reproduction. But no animals plan to reproduce or to have sex. That's why there's the pleasure of the orgasm and the urge to have it. So animals desire to have an orgasm, that's why they get the urge, that's why they mate. But if they can't mate, they'll look for an alternative to get rid of the urge - there's nothing wrong with that genetically. If males don't use their organ, that would eventually lead to medical problems (such as the trouble with the prostate) and that would mean that the weaker males of the species would be completely unable to reproduce - even if there's no more stronger males around. That would in fact be a genetical flaw.

@Sebatianos: My name is Taikara. Tai, if you prefer.

According to Darwin, natural selection is the survival of the fittest. In biology, "fitness" is determined by the species ability to successfully reproduce. A species cannot survive if it does not reproduce, and therefore, it is considered "unfit."

@tai: Sorry about the mistake about writing your name. I edited it.

You're right, the survival of the fittest. But the weaker member of the specie can get a chance. And the one of the weakest members that would use that chance would become the fitter (not the fittest) and would be able to preserve his gene pool. So it's again the same thing, but on another level. This would be a sort of a safety mechanism.

Imagine:
8 lions.
5 females
3 males
The strongest male gets the females by chasing the other two males away. 4 females get impregnated - there's still one left. The fitter of the other two would get the chance.
Being sexually active does make you sexually fitter. So if one of those two males would be inactive and the other would "masturbate" - being active, that would make him the fitter one. So the fitter one could have offspring. And because it's the case with many animals that the strongest one chases the rest away and has more females to himself - the sexual activity wothout the female seems a necesary thing. So in that case homosexuality (or rather bi-sexuality) would actually increase the chances for that animal.

Masturbation is not included in the definition of "fitness" because it does not lead to reproduction. Only traits that lead to 1) offspring and 2) offspring that survive to reproduce are considered when analyzing a species fitness in natural selection.

Well I said sexual fitness. Masturbation is a sexul activity, which makes you sexualy fit. And if you are sexually fit then you are more capable to have offspring. I thought that was rather obvious from my previous post...

since when does practicing a sexual activity make you more sexually fit? How would you DEFINE sexually fit? I mean, one actually has a better chance to impregnate a girl if they DON'T masturbate, because they wouldn't be constantly "drained" and more sperm would be available. And I don't think masturbating makes you sexually fit, because I know many guys who masturbate multiple times a day because they can't get any other action. The lion that gets the lioness, is the bigger, stronger, more feriocious of the bunch, not the one that masturbates the most often.

Sperm have 5 day life span if they are not replaced they are more likely to die b4 reaching the ovula.testicules constantly produce but after a self enjoyment they produce more so you have an armada of young healthy homewreckers

Sperm have 5 day life span if they are not replaced they are more likely to die b4 reaching the ovula.testicules constantly produce but after a self enjoyment they produce more so you have an armada of young healthy homewreckers [/b][/quote]
your body produces more because you are constantly taking away from the supply, but I think most guys can tell you that if they stop for awhile, and start again, your body now has that stored up, and you can release a heck of a lot bigger army instead of smaller platoons. Instead of guerilla warfare, one can just drop the nuclear bomb.

Now, are we talking about sex or about Command and Conquer?

yeah but beleive me a platoon of mamouth tanks can destroy an army of rangers anytime!!!!

The void is confused.

But a massly built up army of Prism Tanks fully ranked can wipe out anything that comes their way. And a fully charged Weather Storm is often much more effective than a platoon of Mamouth tanks.

My question still stands, I don't see how masturbating gives you a sexual advantage, or makes you sexually fit.

As for Void...it's ok man...you'll learn when you're older ;-)

I think you are more confused than me :bleh:

hey the void u were born 4 days after me :cheers:
i am still older haha !!!

cells in ur body adapt to activity (muscles vaccins)
tis the same for testis cells.
when they are really active they develp more mitochondrias more mitosis more sperm..........
Anyway self enjoyment will NOT keep u more fit than rgular sex but will keep u more fit than no action at all.

But how the heck is a lioness supposed to look at a lion and say "Hey, I think that guy know show to handle himself I'm gonna go shack up with him!"

Lioness ???????????????/
I just gave my personal medical (first year medschool woow)opinion
I suffer from extreme lazyness and as u doubted didn't read the start of the topic

@xcom freak: Yes, Lioness. The above scenario came up, and Sebastianos (I think) made the comment that the lioness would choose the more sexually fit of the males, and sexual fitness is improved because they masturbate, or something like that. I'm trying to understand how the lioness or any animal for that matter, would know if a guy relieves himself frequently.

Hmm... So this proves that MALES not only dominate our world but also are the superior beings in the animal's world. :D

What would happen if I find myself alone on an island full of sexy babes? :blink:

I'm not quite sure what would happen, but atleast, I'd try my best to make each and everyone of these babes the member of my One-Mile-High-Club. :tomato:

Or?

Woh... Woh... WOH!

I give you people 2 posts from now to get back on track!

This is about your sexuality (and it is supposed to be serious). Frequently Asked Questions about sperm is not relevant... not even the slightest! Nor is sexual fitness, spermbanks or Croatian trips.

Get back on track, or I will shut this topic down.

OnTopic again:

How can it come that people`s sexuality change after years??

Like...some MEN are married for years before they found out that they are gay...always feel really strange to me :blink:

I guess it could be a need for change. Or they live with a woman for years, every day they see her, they see the worst side of a woman, and after a while they can't handle living with that woman anymore, and then after all those years and seeing the worst side of women, they turn to men.

But that's what I always thought it was.

When you got enough of you're wonen it's more easier to go to another girl..

Keeps a huge step to switch to a men...

Yes, but have you ever heard of the lazy-swimers? That's one of the reasons. A lot of sperm doesn't always mean a good thing.
The sooner it is released into the system, the better quality it is (unless you're just spraying it around - after the seventh time in a row I guess it wouldn't be any good any more).
Also if you're inactive there's a higher chance to get medical problems (like I said many posts ago - when I started talking about this - you can get prostate cancer because you're not sexually active enough). Those medical problems are the ones that make you less fit - thus less capable of reproduction.
Not to mention the fact, that is you haven't gotten rid of your seed in a long time, you won't be as able to hold it for long - meaning the intercourse would last a shorter period of time - which would make the female less receptive - so you'd have a lesser chance to reproduce (OK - people found a way around this with foreplay - but I was talking about animals when started making these arguments- to prove that homosexuality isn't neceseraly a genetical flaw - in fact I think it isn't - it could even be an advantage - just read through all my posts carefully and you'll see what I mean).

but dude, most animal sex doesn't last longer than a few seconds anyway

Edit: But like Tom said, this has gotten way off topic, so I think it's finished

Pigs can go for hours :w00t:
Most animals also hump the same female several times in the row, so the final resoult would be the same (and that means they aren't using their best seed anyway).

EDIT: OK - I don't see how it's off topic, but OK. I'll stop with it too (saw your edit too late).

and also, if you look at most mating in the animal kingdom, it could be classified as rape. When a male horse is after a female, the female tries to run away, but the male chases it, crashes into it, and bites down on it's neck until it is still, does his duty, then takes off

And that is actually the end of this comparison between human and animal sex (which BTW was started by Freddy who said that attraction between males isn't natural and I started comparing things in nature with humans. I guess I went way off the original discusion though).

All right. I think this discussion has gone on long enough. Time to request that it be closed. :not_ok: I see spam coming out of the grave in this one, so.

Seconded! :ok:

This topic has agitated me, hehe.

wish granted.