Hugo Rifkind

Bisexuality is now everywhere – and nowhere

Almost half of young people now identify as neither gay nor straight, although very few use the term ‘bisexual’. I think this is what progress looks like

22 August 2015

9:00 AM

22 August 2015

9:00 AM

I’m not aware of knowing many bisexual people. Or indeed, off the top of my head, any bisexual people. Which is odd, really, because back in my student days you couldn’t move for them. Being bisexual was quite the thing. Or, at least, claiming to be was. The girls really dug it.

This was back in the mid-1990s, not long after the lead singer of a band called Suede, who is a man called Brett Anderson (married to a lady now; two kids) had declared himself ‘a bisexual man who has never had a homosexual experience’. That, at the time, was very much the sort of sexual identity that a trendy, bohemian young chap, of the sort I very much wanted to be, was supposed to be aspiring towards. Or, as Irvine Welsh had Renton put it in Trainspotting, ‘One thousand years from now, there won’t be any guys and there won’t be any girls, just wankers. Sounds all right to me.’

It wasn’t easy, though. For one thing, I wasn’t at all sure which men to pretend to fancy. Normally people overcompensate wildly in this sort of situation — as with closeted young men who put up posters of Pamela Anderson and suchlike — but if I’d claimed lust for, say, Sylvester Stallone, I’m not sure anybody would have believed me. The safe option was Johnny Depp. Everybody fancied Johnny Depp. He had big beautiful eyes and long hair and perfect cheekbones, although I wasn’t really sure what I’d actually want to do with him. It would have been so much easier if he’d had a vagina.

Obviously though, I do actually almost certainly still know quite a lot of bisexual people. Everybody does. Depending, that is, on what the word means. I will know people now in straight relationships who want to have occasional flings with people of their own sex, and perhaps even do, and I probably know gay people who do the opposite. And if they no longer choose to identify themselves in that sort of way, well, no wonder. When you marry or settle down, making a song and dance about all the other people you faintly want to sleep with is simply churlish. One of the strangest and softest bigotries about ‘alternative’ sexual orientations is the notion that they must entail a sense of compulsion. As in, if you spend a while dating blondes and brunettes, nobody ever suggests that this leaves you predisposed to cheat on your brunette wife because you so badly miss the blonde thing.


What seems to be changing, though, is the urge to make a fuss about all this, even in the painfully right-on fashion of the likes of me. According to a story in the Times earlier this week, YouGov has found that almost half of young people (18 to 24) today consider themselves to be neither heterosexual nor homosexual, but something in between. Almost half. That’s a lot. Not a trendy fringe like my lot in the 1990s, but almost a new normal. It made me think of a scene in the film 21 Jump Street where two policeman feign youth to infiltrate a high-school drug gang, try to fit in by punching somebody for being a geek, and then end up being ostracised by their new classmates because he turns out to be gay, too.

The point is, though, they probably wouldn’t actively call themselves bisexual, either. In the most recent census, the figure claiming that among the same age group was a mere 2.6 per cent. Which may mean, I suppose, that they’re all either lying to the census, or lying to YouGov.

Only I’m not sure it does. Rather, I think this is what progress looks like. An absence of fuss. Sexuality, 20 years on, is less about what you are and more about simply what you do. Although what people actually do, I’d bet, will carry on being much the same as what they always did.

The Corbyn crowd

People keep asking me if I think Jeremy Corbyn is anti-Semitic. I don’t. Or at least I think it’s vanishingly unlikely. Why would he be? For all his political unorthodoxy in various directions, his antipathy towards bigotry seems wholly genuine. Indeed, it seems the whole point. I don’t see how it could have such a big blind spot.

If the question gets asked, however, and angrily, I don’t think he’s blameless. My own political awakening came with the pending Iraq war in 2003. I was against it, noisily. I remember quite clearly the first anti-war march I attended, probably in late 2002. Everybody had the same placard, handed out by the organisers. ‘Don’t Attack Iraq’, it said. And then underneath: ‘Justice For Palestine.’

I didn’t understand why. I still don’t. It’s not that I’m against justice for Palestine, but that wasn’t what I’d gone to march about. The connection between Israel and the Iraq war was so tenuous as to be nonexistent, but a strong streak of the Stop the War movement always wished it was stronger. When issues weren’t about Israel — and believe it or not, many aren’t — they always transparently wished they were.

This, for two decades, has been Jeremy Corbyn’s political hinterland. From it sprang all the strange associations he is now accused of having, with all those strange people who think such troublesome things. He could have called it out 20 years ago, had he wished. He didn’t wish. This is what you get.

Hugo Rifkind is a writer for the Times.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10


Show comments
  • jim

    More PR for degenerates. Look,women often go through a phase where they drunkenly fool around with girlfriends but they grow out of it..Straight guys never do that. Homosexuals are wildly over represented in the culture….it’s one of the reasons today’s pop culture is so tacky and twee…It’s just like them.

    • Hades2

      And how do YOU know what `straight guys` and women do in the sack?
      You’re still getting your jollies breastfeeding from your mother and letting her clean your underpants you inbred fascist cretin
      Peace 🙂

      • jim

        Angry little queens are funny.

        • Sue Smith

          Aw come on, he’s just the Wicked Witch of the West. Take away his sparkly red shoes and he loses his power.

          • Hades2

            wow a female homophobe!
            I wonder who she caught shagging her old husband in the backside to turn out like THIS

          • Hades2

            Jesus,
            What a wet blanket!
            complaining about `the gays` getting special treatment (oh my GOODNESS)
            And wounding on the net like a dead sheep!
            You’re not even worth bothering about you ugly little…..
            whatever you are 🙂

        • vieuxceps2

          No,Jim, angry little queens are not funny. They’re dangerous,as the poison from Hades 2 shows. We need to be aware of the success of the homosexual lobby in altering attitudes in their favour throughout society.Equality has been been attained long ago,now they seek special treatment. Not funny at all.

          • Hades2

            Oh I’m poisonous
            bwahahahaha
            You two need to get down and do some serious masturbation
            and then pray to the baby Jesus for your souls
            As it stands you are simply ridiculous!

          • vieuxceps2

            Is there a mirror in your cell? If so, I suggest you take a long look at yourself . If not,bang your head against the nice soft walls instead. Then ask them to increase your medication.

          • NotImpressedbyTripe

            You’ve got dookie stains on your Easter dress, little girl.

            You shouldn’t be eating with your hands. It’s not healthy.

          • Hades2

            er Im not a little girl weirdo
            and what a shit post too lol
            stupid fundie yank piss off back to breitbart stat

          • NotImpressedbyTripe

            No, you are a little girl, little girl.

            But not a cute one.

          • Hades2

            Oh alright then
            If you say so freak lol
            A 6 2″ `little girl` with a 8 inch dick
            Bet you’re whacking off right now you disgusting loon
            Again, get lost Yank Fascist!
            Do any of you not troll on the net

          • NotImpressedbyTripe

            Just look at you pout and stamp your dainty little feet.

            Pretty grotesque, really, but like I said, hairy 6’2″ little girls aren’t cute…they’re just grotesque.

          • Hades2

            Oh jesus
            could you be any more of a moron?
            You are TERRIBLE at this.
            go f**k your sister, brother, mother, Donkey you boring assed dimwit

          • NotImpressedbyTripe

            And stop lifting up your skirt to admire your own dick.

            This is why you have no friends.

          • Hades2

            dude that’s it!
            usually Im not one to say all homophobes are homosexuals
            but ladies and gentlemen!
            I present exhibit A
            Oh, and you’re not may type Im afraid,
            you beached whale

          • NotImpressedbyTripe

            Loser.

          • Hades2

            closet FAGGOT

            :0)

        • Hades2

          ooooh, in your dreams honey
          Dude, you REALLY need to suck a big one before you collapse!!
          hehehe

          • jim

            You lot truly are horrible. Mildly amusing in small doses…but for the most part , just unadulterated upchuck. Just foul.

          • Hades2

            Oh I’m truly horrible to the old age bigot bag of spanners for a brain
            Good grief b**ch, take a look in the mirror
            Oh you’ve smashed all you mirrors haven’t you
            And god, you answered SO quickly
            Either unemployed or more
            Like I said before; one foot & 4 toes in the grave
            (where you won’t be missed 🙂

          • jim

            Like I said.Keep ’em comin’. I could use a laugh. …Solvent and content. Busy too,but I can always make time for baiting you lot.Thanks for asking…..angry queens are a laugh.

          • Suzy61

            You nasty, sad little creature.

            The more outrageous, the more humourous?

            Hardly.

          • Hades2

            what. a. loser
            You barely changed your moniker
            hehehe
            Drop dead you vinegary old WITCH

          • Suzy61

            You are a gift that keeps on giving…

          • Hades2

            61
            So is that your age?
            Or your IQ?
            I’m going with IQ as you clearly are far older (older looking?) than 61.
            It certainly makes more sense.

          • jim

            Your every post has confirmed all our prejudices..and then some. You’re disgusting.

          • person of gender

            What a great advert for the cause you are.

          • Hades2

            I’m not interested in PR stunts to impress the likes of you
            for `the cause` lol or anything else.
            I’m interested in teaching lessons.
            And trash should be treated in kind, it’s all they understand.
            Too bad the average homophobic IQ is in the mid sixites, but not too worry too much chuck, eh?
            😉

          • person of gender

            People with low intelligence naturally assume that they know better than everyone else. The notion that you have anything to teach anyone is absurd.

          • Hades2

            It’s called the `Dunning Kruger Effect `
            You and your evil basement dwelling friends here have it in spades
            🙂

          • person of gender

            I know what it’s called, and you should be very careful when invoking it. It’s a double-edged blade. When was the last time you learnt anything new? When was the last time you were compelled to change your mind about something on which you had hitherto had a firm opinion?

          • Hades2

            I’m learning Mandarin right now
            Does that count?
            Or is the `learning` of nonsense spouted by paranoid loons the only real mind improving kind?
            Thanks, but I’ll pass.

          • person of gender

            I see you sidestepped the question about altering your opinion.

          • Hades2

            I have done nothing of the kind
            And what would it matter if i had said yes, you’ve no way of knowing, either way.
            People that think like you and your friends here are the most narrow minded, irrational and pointless creatures on the planet.

          • person of gender

            The person you are engaging with is a fictional character on an anonymous comment forum. For all you know I could in reality be the most outrageous knobjockey on the planet; and if I were, I would still despise ineffectual little worms whose only form of amusement seems to be hurling insults at people who aren’t exactly like themselves. The reason I’m keeping you talking is to try and elicit some indication of human understanding on your part. No sign of it yet, sadly.

          • wildcolonialboy

            You really have no clue how ironic your accusation of foulness against Hades is.

            Oh well, there are none so blind as those who will not see.

          • jim

            Do I detect the whiff of burning martyr? (Catholic variety).His post are disgusting.You plainly haven’t read them.Spare me your sanctimonious piety.

      • NotImpressedbyTripe

        You’re a real schiesskopf.

        • Hades2

          und du bist einer echte fotze
          nicht whar?
          😉

          • NotImpressedbyTripe

            Give me a qunt over an anus any day, slime-licker.

          • Hades2

            mmmm slime licking yes yummy
            bet you think about such disgusting things quite a lot in your basement
            As well as searching the net about them there`homorosexuals`
            Also for the record, I didn’t say you liked Fotze
            (who said anything about youre eh `preferences`)
            I said you WERE one
            Big difference.

          • person of gender

            That’s ‘wahr’, genius.

          • Hades2

            Oh my Goodness!
            I didn’t realise grammar clown was in
            Oh well
            lol

          • Hades2

            CHANGED!
            Phew, thank goodness for THAT

    • ohforheavensake

      You sound rather repressed. Can we help?

      • justejudexultionis

        Yeah. Sounds like jim is just gagging for gay sex!

        • Hades2

          but far too old to pull it off without a coronary!

      • jim

        Isn’t that the kind of thing queens always say?

    • Linguistician

      “Straight guys never do that”
      Bullshit. Experimentation is just as common in heterosexual males, trust me I’ve happily been experimented on by many a man who is now married with kids.

      • justejudexultionis

        Ah, the things people do in the name of science!

      • Jeffrey Cash

        If you’re a straight man, you’re not attracted to men and thus have no reason to have sex with men. Quite simple, actually. Not that there’s anything wrong with being gay. I’d be equally surprised to hear of a gay man who occasionally has sex with women (unless they’re in a homophobic and repressed country)

        • Hades2

          there’s this thing called `bisexuality`

          • Jeffrey Cash

            If you’re straight, you’re not bisexual. By definition.

          • Hades2

            Yes of course
            But so many people call themselves `straight` that aren’t (mostly, entirely)
            It can be…`interpreted` in a number of ways of course.
            And is less definitive as saying I am a heterosexual!
            Which is not open to interpretation.
            Its one of the little cultural Identity games people like to play
            Trust me, you would be surprised to know how many people say they are `straight` when actually they aren’t.

      • blandings

        I haven’t

      • jim

        A queen’s daydreams.

        • Hades2

          Is that the best you can do?
          `queens`
          bwahahahaha!
          I bet you and Sue are as old as HELL
          (& xtian fundie loons too)

          • jim

            LOL!..Yep… twinky bedwetting hysterics are always good for a laugh.You should understand that three quarters of this country thinks you’re either psychologically disturbed or a pervert. We have yet to see how the remaining 25% would behave if they actually had one of you in the house.I know it’s hard to live with being despised but that’s just the way it is. Enjoy your pretend marriages . Try not to do too much damage to the kids we foolishly allow you to adopt. We’ve got enough trannies to be going on with for now.

          • Hades2

            What?!
            I just can’t take you SERIOUSLY trailer trash lol
            No one does, all this bollox about how eveyone agrees with you (oh I bet you get to go to ALL the best parties rofl)
            You’re just too stupide to realise how vile and silly you are.
            Anyhoo, you’ll be deceased soon enough, `resting` in your paupers grave
            And that will be THAT.
            ENJOY!
            😉

          • jim

            HaHaHa…it’s funny because you don’t know what people say about you behind your back….Keep ’em comin’…I’ll get back to you later…Still laughing at you…

          • Hades2

            Oh I would runaway cry cause they’ve called me a `queen`
            lol
            You old FOOL
            hahahaha

          • jim

            Such a brave little queen. So courageous.

          • Hades2

            Brave?!

            bwahahaha!
            What, kicking the ass of some bitter, boring old codger with no imagination makes me brave?
            You’re probably terrified of the 12 year olds that hang about the post office as you cash in your state pension you pathetic puddle of pee.
            You’re NOTHING to deal with.
            Yawn

          • jim

            ….so brave..so courageous………so proud…..

      • Sue Smith

        Eeeeeeeeeew.

        Don’t touch this guy; you don’t know where he’s been.

        • Hades2

          You’re older and uglier than dirt 🙂
          No one’s `touched you` for a century at least

        • Linguistician

          I hate to break it to you Sue, but men have sex.

      • St Ignatius

        Sounds like you could be cure for a lot of “gay” men. Experimenting with you was enough to set them straight.

        • Linguistician

          Hardly, they were never gay to begin with.

          • St Ignatius

            Well they certainly aren’t now – you said so yourself!

          • Linguistician

            Why does that matter? They had girlfriends at around the same time, I was never under any illusion that these guys were “gay”, but strangely enough at 15 I wasn’t looking for a lifelong commitment so was quite happy to sow some oats with a few good looking guys.

          • St Ignatius

            Yes, all very interesting. Said no one ever.

          • Linguistician

            Oh sweetie, nobody says “…, said no one ever” anymore. It’s so 2011.

          • St Ignatius

            Irony not your strong suit?

          • Linguistician

            Awww, you actually think that infantile phrase passes as irony. Bless.

          • St Ignatius

            If you’re going to try the camp schtick, maybe a sound a bit less like an 80 year old granny? I’m not well versed in what’s going down among the gays these days but I suspect you are overdoing it a bit.

          • Linguistician

            “The camp schtick”…”among the gays”… you seem like one of those people who would come out with the classic: “I’m not homophobic, I have gay friends”.
            You aren’t convincing anyone (and if you want to try wit, you’re going to have to do better than “80 year old granny” – totally lame!

          • St Ignatius

            I don’t define people by their “sexuality” so why would I care what you think about me or my friends. Maybe they are gay, maybe they are not. To me, they are people. Don’t you think that’s a more dignified way to look at humanity than your attempts to categorise, define and denounce. That last comment: yeah, I wasn’t trying to be funny. If you want to be all camp (“Sweetie” this, “Darling” that) it is better not to just sound like an 80 year old. It’s sweetly ironic that you started this tit-for-tat by claiming I was somehow out of date. And then you came along with your Julian Clary schtick. I mean, how unoriginal is that? Very, very, unoriginal. And completely fake.

          • Linguistician

            You’re full of excrement. And I wasn’t being “camp” when I said “sweetie” and “darling” I was being condescending. And I’ve yet to meet an 80 year old who says “darling”.

            “And then you came along with your Julian Clary schtick”
            If you think Julian Clary is all about saying “sweetie” and “darling”, then you’ve clearly never seen him perform. You probably just heard about some camp queer comedian and dropped his name in because gay is camp, right… – big mistake!

            The only thing that’s unoriginal around here is your very thinly veiled homophobia…which is not remotely fake! It’s very real.

          • St Ignatius

            I am not in the slightest homophobic; that’s you just projecting your subconscious feelings. You probably should see a good psychiatrist if you can’t handle your own issues without thinking the world is out to get you.

          • Linguistician

            That makes no sense.
            Only one of us is a straight homophobe, and it isn’t me.

          • Linguistician

            You come across as the kind of person who isn’t homophobic because you have “gay friends”. Delightful.
            And if you are going to attempt wit, you’re going to have to do better than “80 year old granny”. That’s totally lame.

    • Pacificweather

      You mean those guys weren’t straight. Damn. That was a close run thing.

  • Graham Thompson

    You asked on twitter why lefties aren’t bothered by Corbyn being accused of anti-semitism.

    Here’s why.

    Lefties separate modern anti-semites into two groups. One is best represented by a skinhead with a swastika tatooed on his forehead. Lefties don’t like them. The other group is best represented by a western Jewish academic complaining about the IDF dropping chemical weapons on Palestinian children. Lefties like them.

    We looked at Corbyn and assumed it must be the second kind of anti-semitism people were talking about.

    • CrestovaWren

      Turned out you were wrong. He really does appear to spend a lot of his time hosting, promoting, defending and donating money to individuals and groups who say things like “Jews drink the blood of Christian children”.

      • justejudexultionis

        I didn’t know that Corbyn was a supporter of the Tunbridge Wells Women’s Institute Jihad against Israeli Satan.

        • Sue Smith

          LOL

  • CrestovaWren

    When I was at university, there was a chap who ran the LGB society (this was in the days before TQ* was added on).

    He was very camp, and dressed a little bit like a kid’s TV presenter, and started his sentences with “As a gay man… ”

    This LGB officer was always surrounded by a large number of female friends. Speaking to a gay mate from this time, he tells me that (a) not only did this LGB officer never, to his knowledge, actually have sex with a man, but (b) he had sex with a number of his “fag hags”.

    Ah, the things men will do to get sex!

    • blandings

      Clever guy.
      I played it straight and where did that get me?

      • Sue Smith

        Dunno. You tell me.

        Maybe you didn’t have to misrepresent yourself to get ahead in life (if you’ll pardon the unintended pun).

        • blandings

          I will overlook the pun.
          It just didn’t occur to me to misrepresent myself that’s all, though if I had it would probably have all gone horribly, horribly wrong.

          • Sue Smith

            I had my tongue in my cheek when I made these comments!!

    • Sue Smith

      LOL

    • Dominic Stockford

      A chap at school (1975-80) worked that out too. Got all the girls following him round. He must have had a great time while we were all going blind.

    • evad666

      Flying False colours to get close to a target eh?

      • Ambientereal

        Yes, when I was young (a lot of years ago) it was not easy to come close to girls, and insinuate that you where “harmless” was a good tactic.

    • Adam Bromley

      Very clever. You have to admire the ingenuity.

  • justejudexultionis

    Girls are such awfully queer chaps, aren’t they?

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      Straight out of PG Wodehouse.

  • jim

    No one believes Corbyn is anti semitic ….but Hugo is still happy to add to the smearing of a man (albeit in a cowardly disingenuous manner) who is doubtless a fool but in no way a bigot. We are already at the stage where this smear is greeted by a shrug of the shoulders and a response along the lines of :”Well they always say that about anyone who looks sideways at ’em”. Really stupid to use this knee jerk nuclear option. Suppose it doesn’t work? You won’t be believed when we finally have to confront the thirdworld genetic scrap in our cities who really do fit the description.

    • Sue Smith

      Corbyn is somebody who is, according to the fashionable parlance, “a useful idiot”. There are literally legions of them out there, willing to regurgitate the propaganda of the Left.

      • Hades2

        time for your bed bath old bird
        oh look you’ve messed the carpet again
        ;-0

        • blandings

          Your cheap.

          • Hades2

            ?
            Well, you lame, tiresome and an all round amateur
            there, that’s that sorted

          • blandings

            Confirmation, cheap boy

          • Hades2

            from my side aussi, Madame Bland

    • The_greyhound

      Corbyn may not be anti-semitic, but he’s very comfortable around rabid anti-semites. A nasty, lying hypocritial treacherous piece of trash.

  • jeffersonian

    ‘Everybody had the same placard, handed out by the organisers. ‘Don’t Attack Iraq’, it said. And then underneath: ‘Justice For Palestine. I didn’t understand why. I still don’t. It’s not that I’m against justice for Palestine, but that wasn’t what I’d gone to march about. ‘

    But I’ll bet money that it didn’t prevent you from continuing your, ahem, demonstration.

    And by the by, if you still don’t understand the link between the causes you mention in the quote, you should seriously reconsider your career path.

    • wildcolonialboy

      Why don’t you explain it for us? Or are you just going to whine that the link is “obvious”?

      I have little doubt that you are utterly incapable of explaining it

    • wudyermucuss

      I didn’t understand why. –
      Because stop the war are trots and muslim brotherhood.

  • Ambientereal

    Well, in the era of free marriage I ask myself how many people should marry together to ensure complete satisfaction. In case of bis… my calculation gives 4, 2 boys and 2 girls.

  • Precambrian

    Plug on often enough in the media and you can brainwash people quite effectively.

  • Dr. Heath

    Could this be the explanation for the widely reported asexuality of people in Japan? There, it’s reported, young chaps often do not bother asking girls out on dates, preferring to drift into middle age as timid, virgin bachelors. Many stay at home playing on their ‘games consoles’ [i.e. they’re what is called ‘hikikomori’]. Young married couples, when asked by Japan’s version of Cosmo or Hte Gaurndia about their sex lives, report that they haven’t got one. I think Hugo’s cracked this mystery wide open. It’s not asexuality but bisexuality that’s confusing so many Japanese. The answer? Counsellors for all. Our government should be doing the same. Never has the nation needed its nanny more than at this time of crisis.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      Get into character as an English gentleman, guys, and ship yourself somewheres east of Suez. Paradise while sidestepping that distasteful process of dying. So many really great women; so little time.
      Jack, the Japan Alps Brit

      • Labour Mole Catcher

        But you are obviously a single man yourself!

        • Jackthesmilingblack

          Another thing we’ve learned about you. Hardly surprising as obsessive compulsive disorder is not just notorious difficult to cure, it also makes forming close relationships very difficult. Have fun trying to sleep tonight.
          The Japan Alps Brit

          • Labour Mole Catcher

            There is no “we”: apart from your Japanese Mum and Dad, you are a billy-no-mates!

    • Dominic Stockford

      More to do with the cultural issues surounding ‘success’ and doing thigns for the ‘greater good’ which mean they simply don’t know how to relate to anyone.

  • St Ignatius

    How much longer can our society tolerate the narcissism of people endlessly agonising about their “sexuality”? History repeats itself: this particular kind of luxurious decadence has always accompanied the collapse of a major society. I’m not moralising here: the scientific reality is that it takes male and female to procreate, and it the social reality is that it takes married men and women to provide the necessary stability for societal progress. I’m not at all impressed with the idea that the heterosexual majority are expected to produce and raise more taxpayers (and not to mention farmers, engineers, doctors, teachers, soldiers) while an increasingly vocal majority worries more about with whom or what their next orgasm is going to occur than contributing to the next generation.

    • rationality

      Well said. There needs to be more of this. Its noticeable that we never see this type of thing in the MSM which says a lot. It horrifies me that gay marriage is promoted above traditional marriage and when I point this out in conversation, people do tend to listen.

      BTW did you go to the school?

      • Texas Sunday Morning

        It’s just called marriage now pal.

        • rationality

          Well one has the purpose to recreate society, the other is funded by the US government and big business as one of many means to stop the recreation of society. So much better to bring others in instead.

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            But where do the Illuminati and the space lizards fit in? Or the Gnomes of Zurich? I think any conspiracy theory without them is incomplete.

          • rationality

            Thank you for conceding the argument

          • Hades2

            You argument was ridiculous paranoid garbage
            Actually there was NO argument!

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            That word doesn’t mean what you think it means honey.

          • Hades2

            ?!
            hahahahahaha!
            Oh they’re all coming out of the woodwork now…

          • rationality

            This bullying and stupidity is precisely why I post on this subject.

          • Hades2

            hehehe
            Dunning-Kruger Time again
            But be strong and keep on doing your good work for the sake of mankind
            You Saint!

      • St Ignatius

        Thanks. No, I didn’t.

    • Texas Sunday Morning

      Gay people have kids. Also, gay people pro rata adopt more children, which turns small humans who are essentially in a holding cell awaiting jail into functional members of the community.

      And every study so far conducted shows having a loving family matters most, not the biological sex of the two primary care givers.

      • Tom M

        “…… shows having a loving family matters most, not the biological sex of the two primary care givers…….” (what a mouthful)
        However, as opposed to what?
        This gets bandied about so much that I doubt it’s provenance.
        I’d like to know the basis for that conclusion because the implication is that homosexual couples are as good as heterosexual couples at bringing up children.
        Did they compare loving heterosexual couples bringing up children with loving homosexual couples doing the same for example? Or was the comparison just made between all loving couples children and children with no discernable family life whatsoever thus conferring an equality of outcome on both heterosexual and homosexual couples?

        • wildcolonialboy

          Its provenance is bodies like the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Association.

          The comparisons were between families headed by gay parents and families headed by heterosexual parents. You say you doubt, perhaps you could bother to look for yourself? It seems remarkable that you’re willing to live in ignorance simply because you don’t *want* it to be true

          • wudyermucuss

            You ignore contrary evidence,because you don’t want that to be true.
            http://www.frc.org/issuebrief/new-study-on-homosexual-parents-tops-all-previous-research

          • Hades2

            The notorious FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL
            hahahaha!
            Their `research` is nothing more than biased rubbish without any ecological validity posing as respectable scientific work.
            Nobody believes them.
            Xtian Fundies!
            You American fascists pollute the internet with your nonsensical garbage when you really should be out doing `Gods work`
            I actually met an american evangelical recently and he was just lovely, but instead of obsessing about homosexuality and being a stupid irrational bigot he was out in India and Nepal helping people in Leper colonies and victims of earthquakes!
            What has a piece of s**t like you ever done to compare with THAT?

          • rationality

            Absolute definition of hate speech. How very illiberal.

          • Hades2

            Yes, I am intolerant of the intolerant.
            I’ll own THAT one.
            And YOU are, my `friend`, NOT rational person.

            You and your friends here are an affront reason.

          • rationality

            No. We see the agenda for what it is. We see a disturbing agenda to undermine Western principles. We see a world in which our countries are being invaded by the Third World in which we are supposed to accept otherwise we’re all the made up hate words. Gay marriage has been around 5 minutes and we are mandated to accept it. Nowhere in human history has this taken place and its an evolutionary cul due sac. We will speak up.

            Anyway what’s wrong with civil partnership? Not many people have an issue with that.

          • Hades2

            I see that you are a paranoid loon!
            Gay people, in general, are not the head lizards of the Illuminati intent on the destruction of society.
            You undermine any validity that some of your concerns bring up by simply being ridiculous
            Anyway whats wrong with marriage?
            Its DONE now, times of changed.
            No one is forcing you into a GM. Churches aren’t being forced to do them, you can happily go on believing what nonsense you want to believe but GM will only have an effect on you because of your tiresome obsession with it.
            But It makes me happy to see you this miserable, however.

          • rationality

            I see that you’re a gullible fool! This is all about TPTB who want to transform society and diminish Western values. I bet you were the product of a marriage, and your patents, and their parents. Now this is breaking down and the question is why.

            Change is about accepting a democratic system in which you have no real choice, it means accepting millions of third worlders, it means less aspirations, less freedom, less hope. But as long as the gullible water carriers have their ‘rights’ then they can use theirs to trample all over our values. Change is not necessarily good. This is not inevitable. You can see the agenda in almost every article in the Guardian and across the MSM. We know what’s going on.

            I have gay friends, I like gay people. I’ll ask you again what’s wrong with civil partnership?

          • Hades2

            civil partnerships where inadequate in certain areas
            in any instance it DONE.
            Personally don’t care about GM anymore as everyone is equal under the law now
            But the reality is it will make NO difference at all
            Whats the matter with you loony Republicans?
            Apart from the obvious
            As soon as it is something to do with private personal behaviour you get all big government.
            Still; You lose 🙂

          • rationality

            A) why are civil partnerships inadequate? And what gives you the moral clarity to know that it is done and not me or anyone else?
            B) who defines equality? When I’m with my partner we have to arrange a certain method to prevent conception. Gay people don’t. Therefore they are not equal. That is such an important concept that you really need to understand
            C) I am British. The Republicans are a different cheek to the same ass. I find it stunning that you don’t see me as coming from a free speech and freedom of ideas angle but from an outdated, anachronistic blue/red party angle.
            D) wow. It is big Democrat government that’s pushing this agenda. We do not want government to define marriage as it does for GM. Do you not see how the government exploits this to gain more control over the masses? You’re just doing the dirty work for them.
            E) if traditional marriage is not encouraged, where will the next generation of gays come from?

            You have won the battle but definitely lost the debate.

          • Hades2

            your positions are all absurd
            this fear of the human race dying out because of gay marriage is ridiculous and irrational
            You’re being evasive and its too late anyway
            You’re chasing your tail dude.

          • rationality

            My positions are absurd to you as you don’t have the intellectual capacity to reason and be rational with uncomfortable truths.

            Its not the human race, its a particular race that is dying out. Whatever you think of my views please think about that. I wish it wasn’t so sinister but you should see London now.

            It probably is too late. Anyway its divide and conquer from the elites.

            G’day.

          • Hades2

            Muhammad is the number one name for male babies in England
            You think Im a fan (as a bisexual) of Muslim/Islamic culture as it is Today?
            Think again…..

          • rationality

            That’s the point. You think you have GM rights because they (the government) cares? They are doing this to destroy our race and our countries as evidenced by the current invasion of Europe. That really is more of a concern. I’m on this board because I am outraged by the leftish tactics and their success. Look I’m sure we agree on many things but just consider how your cause is being used. I see the same thing in the rape culture narrative, constant race baiting in the media, losing our towns and cities to the third world and we can’t say a thing. Consider this and how GM fits in. This is not by accident.

          • Hades2

            But I AGREE with GM
            And i don’t think it will harm society (but we will see, wont we?)
            There are FAR more serious things to be dealing with than that.
            Not a fan of Feminists, gay rights activists, socialists and Muslim apologists
            But i am a FAN of individual liberty and allowing people to arrange any contracts with each other that they please
            Gay marriage is not `Holy matrimony` etc
            But no one is pushing for that
            This particular culture battle has been won however.

          • rationality

            I’m glad we agree on the more serious issues.

            I too am for individual liberty but as you say its not ‘holy matrimony’. That’s the point you’re redefining the word for a non procreative union. What about polyamory? There really is no limit.

            I agree we’ve lost the battle but you should be concerned by the agenda which has hijacked your cause.

            BTW I have enjoyed our debate but someone above has put me on a list. This is the very problem of the reality of ‘tolerance’.

          • Hades2

            well Im not getting into the age old arguments about any hetero couple
            of any age and reproductive capacity being able to get married
            But it should be obvious.
            Marriage according to you is about procreatrion, but for others (and the law) its about something else
            And for the record Im actually not against polyamory either.
            As long as it is not just the one sex that can engage in it.

          • vieuxceps2

            “Bisexual”? Hallelujah! With a bit of luck you’ll never find another one like you , so NO hateful little Hades any more.

          • Hades2

            That didn’t make any sense
            like all of your other tripe

          • vieuxceps2

            “You don’t have the intellectual capacity”- Exactly.Best not to feed the fool.

          • vieuxceps2

            “Civil partnerships where (sic) inadequate in certain areas” Do tell us which, won’t you……

          • Franks Trate Writes

            Same-sex marriage is even now being repealed in Finland so don’t say “it’s done now”. Laws can be made and un-made.

          • Hades2

            they can try
            Dude, you are an EXTREMIST you just think most people think like you
            But only if they are bitter, old, stupid, american bible bashers that seek to impose their supernaturally motivated values on everyone.
            A bit like ISIS in fact.
            A dying breed
            Literally

          • vieuxceps2

            “Times OF changed” . A measure of your education I fear.

          • Hades2

            you wont win on grammar I’m afraid
            I write and think quickly and dont give a toss what an airhead like you thinks about it
            🙂

          • Old Sammy bin Lardon

            You don’t have to think quickly, dear, you say the same thing over and over again “Anyone who doesn’t like it up the jaxy is mentally retarded.” The most limited vocabulary would be able to provide a few variations on that.

          • Hades2

            You WHAT you disgusting old pr*ck?!
            hahaha
            go jump out the window now and save us all the expense of you
            What a waste of incontinence pads!
            lol

          • Old Sammy bin Lardon

            My disgusting old pr*ck has seen more suppurating pustules than you could fit in an average-sized frying pan. But enough about me. Whence comes this hostility, sweetie? What are you covering for? Fear? Shame? A sense of inadequacy?

          • Hades2

            spare me your shitty psych 101 plattitudes or are you some kind of homophobic feminist or something?
            Your are clearly disgusting
            And boring
            Your whole life is was and whats left of it will be `inadequate`.

          • Old Sammy bin Lardon

            Or is it possibly your grotesquely inflated, overbearing ego that is causing you such distress? You should realise that such a level of vanity as you exhibit is likely to be the wellspring of your homosexual impulse: being utterly self-involved you despise the ‘other’ and approve only of those who most resemble yourself. You came onto this thread thinking you were going to destroy us all with your devastating wit, quite unaware that like all narcissists you are devoid of imagination and have only hate-filled invective at your disposal. That will be ninety-five guineas, please.

          • Hades2

            f*ck off you toothless old drunk!
            Go pester your budgie if you need attention.
            Your nonsense is tedious beyond belief!

          • Mr Boris Morris

            Tedious or not, it’s true, though, isn’t it, Daisy?

          • Hades2

            No is NOT true, whatever it is you think is true
            I don’t bother reading your bilge you pathetic old harridan
            go get beat up you deluded old twerp
            Daisy?
            Jesus you’re S-A-D
            hehe

          • Hades2

            Read it now
            Oh and I did beat them all off you sad arsehole
            FAct theyre long gone for the hills.
            You’re the last of the mohicans
            And I dont give a toss about you
            whats so special about your imagination anyway, you deluded festering non entity?
            Posting on the spectator website obviousdly makes you think you are some incredible mental behemoth
            When all you are is a pathetic sexless old pissy in pissed in the pants octogenarian
            Suck my d*ck you pathetic old twat

          • Mr Boris Morris

            You’re absolutely hilarious. An angry falsetto screeching in the wilderness. If you hate this exchange so much why the fck do you keep answering?

          • Hades2

            because you are following me around like some love sick puppy
            (Although we all know you are far too old for that)
            but I’ll let you have the last word bitch

          • Mr Boris Morris

            If you were going to do that you would have done it. What do you see in me anyway?

          • vieuxceps2

            Hush Hades. The nurse might hear you and give you more pills .

          • Hades2

            you are useless and will getting the beating of your life by me if I can follow you on your threads that is
            You’re an utter amateur and stop f**king stalking me like some 17 year old girl
            If you haven’t got anything to say SHUT UP dude
            Get lost or I’ll smack the SOUL out of you!

          • vieuxceps2

            Repeat after me: Medication, Medication, Medication.

          • Hades2

            repeat after me; twat twat and double twat.

            yawn, just go away you pointless also ran

          • vieuxceps2

            Is a”double twat” the one used by bisexuals?

          • Hades2

            now now don’t ask me NAUGHTY questions like that
            we don’t want you getting all hot and bothered at your advanced age, do we now?
            might send you down the HATCH!

          • Franks Trate Writes

            Rubbish. The research done by the Family Research Council is among the best available. It is carried out according t o logical, scientific procedures,And by the way, India and Nepal are two places Western homosexual men like to go to molest children.

          • Hades2

            The FRC are an entirely discredited hate group that serve as a front for religious fundamentalistic homophobes who are entirely irrational at the core
            They fool nobody apart from the likes of you.

            But who gives a damn about your recommendation.
            Fortunately almost NO ONE.

          • Tom M

            Can I remind you that it isn’t me making the claim. I’m asking how your claim can be substantiated.
            Throwing a lot of names around isn’t supporting your point it sounds too much like 97% of scientists ……etc etc.
            Personaly I can’t see how introducing clearly unnatural parenting into a childs life, and consequently having to explain this situation against perfectly natural and easy to understand natural parenting can be anything other than confusing for any child.
            I don’t suppose I’ll get any credit but I would select a loving gay couple over a lot of the heterosexual couples I see trying to bring up children. However that wasn’t the point was it.

          • Jeffrey Vernon

            The study most often cited is Wainwright et al 2004
            http://people.virginia.edu/~cjp/articles/wrp04.pdf

            While there are dozens of other publications, many of them suffer from low n numbers, ‘snapshot’ rather than long-term study designs, or are more interested in the attitudes of the parents than the adjustment of the children. It has to be remembered that most children growing up with same-sex parents have come from divorced families, which can skew the outcomes.

          • Franks Trate Writes

            These so-called studies were useless because the parents were allowed to judge their own child’s “happiness” and used things like academic success rates to prove they were wonderful.

        • Texas Sunday Morning

          It simply means that lots of factors can account for rate and level of childhood development, but no one has been able to demonstrate that the sexuality of their parents has any effect.

          If you want to dig in to individual methodologies then have at it. I’ll even give you a paper to get you started. http://m.pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/03/18/peds.2013-0377

      • rationality

        Not according to the digging I’ve been doing and your lies won’t help.

        You think that its the decent thing to do is to take a child from its mother?
        Children in gay families tend to have ancestry issues as they often don’t have grandparents, aunts and uncles. They are more likely to be molested. Gay men tend to be more promiscuous and as there is no biological link to the child, families are more prone to break down. There is more influence of a homosexual encouragement affecting gender identity. These are the issues and if you say this publicly you’re guilty of a hate crime, secular blasphemy. So we can’t discuss the issues that will damage children’s wellbeing. That is absolute tyrrany.

        • wildcolonialboy

          You claim you’ve been doing “digging” but decline to enlighten us as to what your no-doubt in-depth research has found.

          Personally, I tend to value professional bodies like the American Psychological Association (who say “On the basis of a remarkably consistent body of research on lesbian and gay parents and their children, the American Psychological Association (APA) and other health professional and scientific organizations have concluded that there is no scientific evidence that parenting effectiveness is related to parental sexual orientation”), but maybe you’ve found some far right conspiracy websites that can give us an equally credible opinion?

          As to gay people being more likely to molest, that is a revolting slur and completely unsupported by the facts. On the other hand, we do know your beloved Christianity has form when it comes to raping children.

          If you are so detached from reality that you think leaving a child with a crackhead, schizophrenic biological mother is preferable to it being adopted by a married, employed gay couple, then I’d be more worried about your putative children than theirs.

          • rationality

            The American Psychological Association? You undermine your argument with an organisation that somehow wants to undermine Western civilisation. We both know what this is about and of course I won’t be sharing sources to support a very scarey and disturbing agenda.

            I read somewhere that molestation is 2% for straights and 22% for homosexuals. Don’t get me wrong I like gay people and will defend them but not when I’m lied to so brazenly. I’m not Christian per se. There are other religions that abuse children as in secular schools, but a lot of capital went into the demonisation and emasculstion of the Christian church. Why just Christianity?

            A crack head, schizophrenic biological mother? Wow. That is shockingly heterophobic and shows a disturbing attitude towards genetic offspring, somewhere between disgust and jealousy. Either way I find your remark bigoted, insulting and very offensive. Definitely a hate crime.

          • Franks Trate Writes

            Yes the statistics reveal that the 1.5% of homosexuals in the population carry out about half of t he total child abuse, In other words as much as the other 98.5% put together. So much for “Love is Love”.
            The homosexuals are also more likely to be drug-abusers or have a relationship breakdown. Look at the statistics

          • vieuxceps2

            Not sure about gay people and child abuse. If a man abuses a boy then is it not likely that the man is gay? Likewise with women and girls, one supposes. There are ,alas, many such cases of man-on-boy abuse in the news.

          • Jeffrey Vernon

            The APA was founded in 1892; I would be astonished if it did not formerly claim, probably up until 1980 or thereabouts, that homosexuals have an organic disorder requiring treatment. What interests me in this back-and-forth you’re having with @rationality and other posters is that both sides are trading facts and figures. Does anyone have a principled moral or political position on the question? Or is it all a matter of consequences?

          • Franks Trate Writes

            Rubbish, There is immense evidence that homosexuals are far more likely to abuse children, and most of t his evidence comes from homosexuals themselves – or their long suffering children, The Newton-Truong case, the life story of Moira Greyland and many. many more.
            askthebigot.com/2015/07/23/the-story-of-moira-greyland-guest-post/

        • Texas Sunday Morning

          Citation needed sweet cheeks.

          • rationality

            Try Google. There’s plenty out there. I fear the power of your lobby and the illiberal use of hate crime legislation against dissenters. Its why I’m on here as we’re losing the freedom of speech.

          • Hades2

            yes its clear you `try google` a LOT
            Googling the FRC
            and NOM and the AFA
            etc, etc
            😉

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            Don’t worry, your name has been added to the list already.

          • rationality

            Very chilling. What list?

          • rationality

            I’m really disturbed that you have intimidated me because I gave some objections to gay marriage. How dare you censor my free speech.

            Putting people on lists is what they do in Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia. I fear for society I really do.

          • Franks Trate Writes

            You are right to do so. the attack on free speech is very serious, We need to repeal bad laws passed under the Blair government.

          • Ivan Ewan

            Your list of people to fantasise about exterminating?

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            Psh, that list is far too select for random losers on the interwebz.

          • rationality

            List please. I have asked several times now.

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            Sorry, data protection forbids me. X

          • ButcombeMan

            When doing your searching. Ensure you use Google Scholar.

            Prepare to be amazed.

          • Ivan Ewan

            Not that you bother with any citation yourself.

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            He accused me of being a liar, that’s the point citations became necessary.

          • rationality

            I didnt accuse of being a liar. I refused to give you my sources due to this type of totalitarianism. Is this how you achieve ‘tolerance’.

            What list?

          • rationality

            I’m still waiting for that list.

            All because I raised uncomfortable truths. Fascist.

        • Ambientereal

          You are right, there is a huge amount of evidence, even in the statements of pro gay like “Gay people have kids”. No, they can´t, then “having” kids is to bring them into the world. They can only adopt if there is no hetero couple available.

          • rationality

            Absolutely. And the thought of taking a child from its mother is irrelevant.

      • St Ignatius

        “Gay” is a social construct, not a biological fact. Male and female are objective realities based on objective data: genitalia and chromosomes. Males are *objectively* ordered towards females for the production of children. Whether they act like that or not is a different matter; this is fact. With me so far? From a scientific perspective, it is *humans* who produce children and there is no need to say “gay people”. Gay people are human and that’s the point: nature does not care whether they call themselves “gay”, they are male or female. What matters is do they have the correct physical material to reproduce. Of a homosexual couple only one of these same-sex partners can be the biological parent in terms of the biological material required to produce a child. Two males cannot reproduce, nor can two females. Still with me? That is the fact of the matter. Now, you want to say that it doesn’t matter whether a child is raised by his biological parents or not, and you claim studies prove this is the case. Except you missed the single most important *longitudinal* study: history, the existence of the nuclear family and the persistence of marriage as traditionally understood as the union of man and woman for the raising of children. It’s not as if homosexuality is a new phenomenon, and if your claim was true, there would have been no need for – in the last 2000 years since ancient Rome and Greece where homosexuality was positively de rigeur – natural marriage.

        • wildcolonialboy

          Actually, with new technology coming online, both can be biological parents. Currently my plan is that my partner’s sister is going to donate an egg which will be fertilised with my sperm and implanted in a surrogate.

          Given how closely related siblings are genetically, our child would be 50% my genetic offspring and 49.99% his. And ten years from now even that won’t be necessary, as they are developing methods that turns a stem cell into an ovum.

          And even that genetic argument is pretty bogus; you seem to be saying all adopted children are somehow illegitimate?

          • rationality

            Brave New World was fiction. It wasn’t a blueprint. We are meant to be viviparous.

          • wildcolonialboy

            Did you mean to say that it wasn’t a fiction, it was a blueprint? In any case, it sounds like you are as confused on that point as you are confused about sexuality and reproduction.

            Humans with type II diabetes aren’t supposed to survive. Humans who require glasses should have been killed off bya lion in evolutionary terms. Humans aren’t supposed to travel through the air at 500 miles per hour. Women should die regularly in childbirth, and in pure natural terms, we shouldn’t be communicating electronically across vast distances, using artificial light when we used to sleep when the sun went down.

            If you want to insist on some kind of “pure” caveman lifestyle that’s fine, but don’t be a hypocrite. Give up your car, give up modern medicine, give up computers, put on your hair shirt and sandals and go live like the Greeniacs

          • rationality

            Well if you want to do the unpaid work pushing the elite agenda fine, but I’ll remain sceptical of a government and the banks that own them, considering that they destabilise middle eastern countries, open the borders to anyone and fail to protect its citizens.

            Please tell me where two gay animals rear children. Face it there is no evolutionary reason for gay people to raise kids. You can shout and make up all the hate names you want but it will never happen. Barren heterosexual couples do benefit from technology but they are the true parents and have a shared responsibility that has done civilisation so well until… oh what was the name of that Fabian style movement? It was then when things went wrong.

            Yes all those wonderful things in the future such as driverless cars and more middle class jobs to be automated. Not really much to be excited about when there’s no work. But at least you have your designer or ethnic baby. Thats all that really matters.

          • St Ignatius

            Ah yes, that awkward 0.01%, and the fact you still need the egg. Annoying huh. Sounds like it was you made the bogus argument. Re “illegitimate”: not at all, even adopted children should have the right to know who are their biological parents. Or do you think children are just commodities and the rights all belong to the “parents” , not the children?

          • Jeffrey Vernon

            You can do better than that. Take a skin cell from your partner and grow it in the lab; treat it so that the SOX17 stem cell gene is switched on; this will reprogram the skin cell to form an egg cell precursor; and then you can fertilise it. It works in mice, and might come on stream for humans in the next few years.

            If you follow the plan you outline above, your sums are not right; your partner has only 50% of his sister’s genes (on average), and so the child will only be 25% identical to him.

        • Texas Sunday Morning

          No, men are not “objectively ordered” towards women. A species consisting entirely of bisexuals would still happily reproduce. Further, sex in gregarious mammals, which we are, serves not only a reproductive function but works to foment social bonding. We can see this in many other species, particularly our closest relatives the Bonobos. This group bonding was, incidentally, why the sexual escapades endemic in elite British education were over-looked.

          The “nuclear family” of mum, dad, two kids and rover in a house in suburbia is the product of post-war affluence, a historical anomaly already breaking down. As anyone vaguely aware of the actual history will know, the extended kinship group consisting of multiple generations of relatives by blood, marriage and association living in close proximity was the norm. This is before we touch on the fact that monogamy never meant men could not have access to women of lower social status (servants, slaves, prostitutes), or that prior to DNA testing many men raised children not their own without being any the wiser.

          The point of marriage for a millennium has been about transmission of property. That’s why the institution continued. Marriage between the peasantry was a matter of rather low consideration.

          • St Ignatius

            I was trying to discuss science and you went off on your social theory, which is not relevant to reproduction from a biological point of view. Anyway, in terms of reproduction, male genitalia have evolved to be compatible with female genitalia in order (that word again) to reproduce. I cannot see how any sane, educated person can deny this?

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            The point of sexual interaction in higher primates is not only about reproduction, it’s about social bonds to ensure the better functioning and survival of the group. Same-sex bonds are common in the other species close to us, as well as existing in all human societies at all times. It’s definitively not “social theory”, it’s biology.

          • St Ignatius

            If you want to equate homosexual activity to the amoral, animalistic, evolutionary-driven behaviour of apes then don’t let me stand in your way. You said it, not me.

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            Humans are apes. Everything we do is the behaviour of apes.

          • St Ignatius

            If you believe that humans are merely apes and caught up in a purely natural evolutionary scheme then you have no basis for assuming that you are not simply being tricked by evolution into thinking that. It’s a self defeating argument: there is no reason whatsoever to believe any of your thoughts – which are simply part of the evolutionary system – are objectively real.

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            I’m talking about science, and you’re throwing the classic theist tantrum of “if I can’t be right then knowledge itself doesn’t exist”.

            Humans are apes. You calling behaviour ape-like as an insult is meaningless, because all human behaviour is, by definition, the behaviour of apes.

            Sexual acts for reasons other than reproduction are common in humans and other apes. Same sex partnerships are common in humans and other apes. This is scientific fact, and evolutionarily understandable as social bonding techniques.

            Stop trying to make reality match your Bronze Age nonsense. It’s like trying to cram a bagel in your ear.

          • St Ignatius

            I am a scientist and I was assuming you were smarter than you are. Sorry: you are clearly not very well educated in science or philosophy. Let’s take it back a step. If humans are apes – which is your argument for homosexuality being a “good thing” in the human species – then there is no rational basis for excluding other behaviour that you merely dislike. Child sacrifice, rape or paedophilia, could all be explained in the same way: it is “natural” and serves the evolutionary purpose. However what I am saying is that such a reductionist theory is obviously flawed and obviously self-defeating. I’m really not sure in the Bronze Age there were too many people critiquing evolution, as it didn’t exist. Anyway, go away and think about it, and stop merely parroting the lines your school teacher is giving you.

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            If you’re a scientist, why can you only make Sunday School arguments?

            Your previous argument was that only male-female sex for reproductive purposes was “ordered”, a meaningless term, and that same sex relations were some social affectation.

            Same sex attractions occur throughout nature, and have a perfectly understandable evolutionary role. Hence, your arguments that only male and female creatures should engage in sexual relations are a desperate attempt to deny the reality we see around us.

            So we demonstrate same sex relationships are standard for apes, which we are. We can then have a discussion about morality of actions, once you have accepted that you don’t get to recruit science to the problem you personally have with men kissing.

          • St Ignatius

            Not at all. If you want any credibility, try to attack the strong points of an argument, not mischaracterise it as the one you want it to be. As I said, you aren’t very well educated. Certainly not if you think it’s the “Sunday School” (do these even exist anymore?) that deals with such concepts. Let’s try another tack. Mathematics: is it objectively true, or empirical?

          • St Ignatius

            To be honest, it’s clear you don’t understand evolutionary theory. No credible scientist would advance such an obviously reductionist, unfalsifiable theory of the kind you hold. It literally is primary school stuff.

          • Hades2

            Its YOU that doesn’t have a clue you pretentious twerp
            Child Sacrifice, Rape and peadophillia and Zoophilia can always be excluded as they are forms of violence and abuse against the unwilling.
            They are behaviours with a very clear logical distinction, regardless of whether they were practiced in the past with regularity or not.

          • St Ignatius

            In an evolutionary system, logic is irrelevant.

          • Hades2

            In the (now pay attention) ANALYSIS of one it certainly is not

          • St Ignatius

            Not much doing that when you haven’t established if your “analytical” tools actually work is there? You are confused anyway, it’s empirical not analytical.

          • Hades2

            LOL, pretentious rubbish!!!

            A Logical analysis can be applied to any empirical data, it’s the way the mind processes it’s information to conceptually understand it.

            And when you include lines in your `posts` such as (drum roll);

            `If humans are apes – which is your argument which is for homosexuality being a “good thing” in the human species – then there is no RATIONAL BASIS for excluding other behaviour that you merely dislike`

            I think it’s clear that you don’t even know what the fuck your talking about. In your dismal little supernaturally motivated mind you clearly think you’re a smart fellow.

            People that think like you often do but sadly almost NEVER are.

          • St Ignatius

            If your only recourse is an argument to authority, there is no way you are a scientist. If you are so narrow minded to think you can decide in advance what is right because of the person who says it, you are not even educated. Don’t get into this fight with me – I do science for a living at a level you can’t comprehend.

          • Hades2

            Oooh scary 🙂
            You’re a pretentious irrelevancy.
            And I never said i was a f**king scientist even ONCE!
            I don’t care about your supposed credentials.
            It could be even true (snigger), but we are never going to know, so there you go.
            And I simply don’t care, either way.
            Your fallacious reasoning & pretentious posturing is sufficient for me to know all that is required here with regards to your positions
            None of it is a surprise to me because I know (from experience) you are ACTUALLY motivated by supernatural beliefs in your positions. You are merely too lacking in self awareness and/or basic honesty & integrity to simply own up to it.
            A towering intellect indeed…
            Oh, My, Goodness!
            hahahahah!

          • St Ignatius

            “Knowledge itself doesn’t exist”, is a “classic” is it? Only a fool would think a smart person would claim this. There are different kinds of knowledge, of course. The idea is not to burn a straw man (as you do) but to ask why, if humans are merely apes, do we know about abstract facts such as mathematics and why do we have a moral sense. These are the questions the big boys tackle.

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            So your current argument is humans aren’t apes?

          • St Ignatius

            Oh dear. You really are a dimwit.

          • Ivan Ewan

            So if someone throws excrement at you, I expect you’d take it well and throw some back.

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            The way you spend your weekends is up to you Ivan, just make sure you wash your hands after and preferably wear goggles.

          • Ivan Ewan

            Why bother? Apes don’t wear goggles and apparently, anything apes do is fine for humans to do as well. Don’t you pay attention to your own great pearls of wisdom?

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            Humans are apes. Humans wear goggles. Therefore you are in error.

      • vieuxceps2

        “Citation needed ,er sweet cheeks” Isn’t that what you said to mr.rationality?

        • Texas Sunday Morning

          After he called me a liar and demonstrated he wasn’t discussing in good faith. Context is everything honey buns. X

          • vieuxceps2

            But, still no citation I see. Why is that ?

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            He didn’t ask me for one.

          • vieuxceps2

            But I did. And do .

          • Texas Sunday Morning

            On the fact that biological sex of the primary care givers doesn’t affect childhood development? Here’s one I posted elsewhere in the thread from a peer reviewed journal. http://m.pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/03/18/peds.2013-0377

          • vieuxceps2

            Thank you

    • Dominic Stockford

      Correct. However there is nothing like the blindess of those justifying their own desires for missing the lessons of history.

      • St Ignatius

        It will be short-lived: you cannot argue with nature and homosexuality is clearly a very poor evolutionary strategy.

        • wildcolonialboy

          So is monogamous marriage. Thankfully, we base our laws on what is best for people, not what is best for some putative evolutionary strategy (putative because you are demonstrating a clearly flawed understanding of evolution)

          In any case, maybe you should convert to Islam or something? You’d probably be far more comfortable living in Saudi Arabia

          • St Ignatius

            I don’t think monogamous marriage has ever been universally observed, nor was I arguing for it. This discussion is about male-female, not marriage. Re. evolution: sure, homosexuality might play a role in advancing some species but in humans it has not thus far. There are also some species who sacrifice themselves entirely for the advancement of their own. Child sacrifice has also been observed and may have played some role in an evolutionary explanation. Who knows? Not only is evolution a reductionist theory but it has nothing to say about what *should* happen. Whereas homosexuals are quite vociferous about telling us we *ought* to have equality. But that discussion has nothing to do with science.

          • St Ignatius

            And you can leave out the snide remarks. It just makes you look stupid.

        • Pacificweather

          Let’s hope so. 5 million years is quite long enough for any species.

        • Hades2

          What a pretentious and meaningless post
          You don’t have a clue with such drivel
          And homosexuality is not `arguing` with nature, it’s part of it.

          • St Ignatius

            “you don’t have a clue” … if you want that accusation to stick, you’ll need to (a) delete most of your previous rantings and (b) actually say something that refutes my points.

          • Hades2

            No, I just need to inform you that it might be time for you to come up from the basement, remove your nappy and put some clothes on and finally come out for some fresh air,
            or are you locked up?

          • St Ignatius

            ^ What does this even mean?

          • Hades2

            your points were the rantings of a secret bible basher in the throes of the Dunning-Kruger Effect
            Nothing more…

        • Jeffrey Vernon

          Assuming that homosexuality is any kind of evolutionary strategy, and that human traits are subject to the same selective pressures as in natural populations – it only accounts for about 1% of the population, so it’s plainly being maintained only at a very low level.

      • Hades2

        And nothing like a creepy, sanctimonious old homophobe using religion to justufy his own bigotry
        And yes you ARE religious so give it a rest with the lessons of history clap trap.
        Idiots!

    • Ambientereal

      Homos.xuality is a way of having fun but has nothing to do with s.x. The late is the union of compatible s.x organs, anything else is m.st.rbation.

      • wildcolonialboy

        The English language and its agreed definitions would beg to differ. But feel free to go on making up your own parallel language; it’s amusing to see how far people will go to make manifest their bitterness about the changes in society.

        • Ambientereal

          My bitterness is about giving to some things names of some other things. If you call table to a chair it will be confusing. If you call s.x many different things it will be also confusing. You know, I never climber a mountain, and I would call “mountain” the stairs of my building, and “Himalaya” to my neighborhood, so that I can proudly say “I climbed a mountain in the Himalayas”

      • Hades2

        So, do you have fun with it?
        After all its not actually sexual activity…..

        • Ambientereal

          Well wen you say s.x you are probably meaning inter-course. What is not inter-course is mast.r-b.tion, and it is of course also fun.

          • Hades2

            I thought that’s what you were suggesting actually.
            Banging someone in the B8tt seems quite intercoursey however..
            Although i get what you are saying actually.

          • Ambientereal

            Nope, B8tt not a s.x organ

    • Pacificweather

      I guess a saint wouldn’t worry about his next organism but, allegedly, most men think about it every 20 seconds. I have been known to go as long as 5 hours without thinking about it.

      • NotImpressedbyTripe

        Your next organism?

        I don’t even want to ask…

      • St Ignatius

        Quite: Saints have to be physically deceased so your point is entirely redundant.

        • Pacificweather

          Sorry to learn you are dead (physically or otherwise) but it’s good to see you keep posting despite it. Shame about the orgasms though.

          • St Ignatius

            Logic isn’t your strong point clearly.

          • Pacificweather

            Nor a sense of humour yours.

          • St Ignatius

            I’d rather be clever than funny. Life is so much easier that way. You know, they pay you well for it.

          • Pacificweather

            You get paid more than the comedian with the off shore account? That’s pretty good. Next you might step up to premier league footballer.

          • St Ignatius

            This literally makes so sense. What’s the median take home salary of a “comedian”. All those losers scrubbing around trying to be funny at the Edinburgh Festival: do they have off-shore accounts? No, of course not. Even if your point was logical – which it is not – you would want to compare the highest paid funnyman to the wealthiest tech innovators. How’s that comparison going to work out for you.

          • Pacificweather

            How much did mathematicians get paid before they invented hedge funds? They were so clever it took them 20 centuries to learn how to make money. They finally developed a sense of humour and the rest was easy.

          • St Ignatius

            So, you are saying that because mathematicians have been altruistic in the past, that it doesn’t take mathematics to create advanced technology on which the most valuable companies on the world are based? That’s not a valid argument. In fact it’s so dumb it is not even wrong, it’s just drivel.

          • Pacificweather

            Yes, those altruistic matheticians, formally paid a pittance (at their own request of course) for helping to develop the worlds greatest technology finally went and discovered how to laugh at those who couldn’t understand their mathematics and became billionaires at their expense. Laughing all the way to the bank as the saying goes. Those without a sense of humour still work for BAE Systems. Never underestimate the importance of a sense of humour.

  • Cobbett

    This worthless rag proves there is no(mainstream) Right Wing opposition to the Cultural Marxism that we’re forced to swallow….fcuk them.

    • Texas Sunday Morning

      Oh yeah, you were “forced to swallow” weren’t you pal?

      • sidor

        Flirting?

      • wildcolonialboy

        Why are they always obsessed with having things shoved down their throat? It’s almost like they have no clue of how revealing it is in the Freudian sense

  • stephengreen

    No, over 50% not a lot really. The poll does not break down the respondents into sexes (https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/08/16/half-young-not-heterosexual/) It’s clear that many women, pushed as they are by cultural means as expressed in the article, will not state they are ‘100% hetero’. Some males, I’d guess but a much smaller fraction. So girl has snog with her mate at uni ‘lesbian chic is so cool yah’ cue tedious newspaper articles to pile on that *really* our sexuality is just ‘fluid’ ‘innnit.

  • ViolinSonaten b minor.

    Absolute rubbish that homosexuality is everywhere and everyone is agonizing about their sexuality. The left would like you to think that as it purposely tried effeminate
    and belittle masculinity and created the cult of butch Feminists.
    Everyone is now confused about what they are, you even have transgender to
    confuse the issues even more.

    Just more nonsense to create victims.

    • Texas Sunday Morning

      How exactly is a sex act which doesn’t include women “effeminate”?

      • sidor

        The actions of the (mail) partners aren’t exactly symmetric. One of them imitates a woman. That undeniably effeminates.

        • Ambientereal

          O funny “imitates” …so they are “pretending” to do something they are actually not doing. So they are not having s.x?

          • sidor

            It depends on what you call sex. Clinton thought it wasn’t.

        • Texas Sunday Morning

          You and your boyfriend are doing it wrong.

      • jim

        What a stupid question!!

        • Texas Sunday Morning

          And yet you can’t answer it. Which makes you what exactly?

      • Ambientereal

        Sx act is the union of “compatible” sx organs. It is quite clear isn´t it.

        • Texas Sunday Morning

          The only thing clear is your lack of imagination.

          • Ambientereal

            OK, then you “imagine” you are doing it? Good customer for virtual s.x

      • wildcolonialboy

        I’ve never understood this bizarre idea that gay men are effeminate. I mean, they f*ck men

        • ArtieHarris

          My impression is that most gay men are decidedly not effeminate. In many cases, they are super macho.

    • Ambientereal

      There are so many shoe models in the shoe-store that everyone is confused about what is the one he likes most.

  • MrJones

    If progress relies on school and media brainwashing then it’s not progress; it’s 1984.

  • Suzy61

    ‘So, if there is a gay chromosone, why is there not a bi-sexual chromosone?’….I once asked someone who said he knew of such things.

    ‘There is’ he replied…’it’s called the ‘last orders” chromosone.

  • Sue Smith

    Come on now, it’s the ‘new normal’.

  • Kennybhoy

    “I didn’t understand why. I still don’t. It’s not that I’m against justice for Palestine, but that wasn’t what I’d gone to march about. The connection between Israel and the Iraq war was so tenuous as to be nonexistent, but a strong streak of the Stop the War movement always wished it was stronger. When issues weren’t about Israel — and believe it or not, many aren’t — they always transparently wished they were.”

    My take.

    In current form it dates back to the 1991 Gulf War. Saddam Hussein used the notion of “linkage” as a propaganda tactic – he would withdraw from Kuwait when Israel withdrew from occupied territories, blah blah. The Palestinian leadership of that time publicly condemned this specific tactic, which incidentally made them the target for persecution by other Arabs, and the general idea that all events in the Middle East were so linked. But the idea resonated with the left-liberal consensus in the West. They are the heirs to a different antisemitic tradition than Middle Eastern Moslems. One in which Jews are a powerfull, malign force behind the scenes. Traditional Moslem antisemitism would see this as giving Jews to much credit. In the years after the Gulf War the left-liberal media transplanted the notion of “linkage” back into the Middle East.

    • sidor

      “They are the heirs to a different antisemitic tradition than Middle Eastern Moslems. One in which Jews are a powerfull, malign force behind the scenes. ”

      I don’t think you understand what has been going on in the Middle East the last 3000 years. More importantly, the Israeli government doesn’t seem to understands. For that reason it doesn’t have any strategy. Its last step, alliance with the Saudis and ISIS against Assad is a clear symptom of schizophrenia.

      • wildcolonialboy

        You seem to be confused. There is no Israeli alliance with ISIS, you really should try not to get sucked in by conspiracy nonsense. It simply makes you look silly.

        As for the Israeli government not understanding the Middle East… you really are determined to make a fool of yourself, aren’t you? It seems they understand the cruel reality of ME politics better than anyone else. Hence they have not just survived, but thrived, in the most violent part of the world, managing to win every war against their much larger neighbours, and create a prosperous, advanced democracy that encompasses everything from socialist kibbutzes to charedi Jewish communities to Christian monasteries to the Tel Aviv gay scene to the pedestrian, secular conservatism of the Jerusalem suburbs.

        Israel’s accomplishments would suggest they understand their region better than anyone. Certainly better than you do.

        • sidor

          If the strategy is survival as you described, it means no strategy. Just uncorrelated sequence of moves. That is what we have been observing for decades. Thanks for supporting my point.

          In this way, Israel is a singularity in the Middle East: all the rest understand perfectly well their strategy in the general ME historical context.

          The Israel’s alliance with the Saudis, sponsors of ISIS, has been officially announced.

        • Old Sammy bin Lardon

          Either sidor thinks that there is another player in the ME that none of us know about, including Israel, or he thinks that islam has been around for 3000 years.

      • Kennybhoy

        “I don’t think you understand what has been going on in the Middle East the last 3000 years. ”

        Enlighten us then…?

        • sidor

          Conflict of (two) civilisations. As a homework, try to figure out which ones.

          • Kennybhoy

            Two civilizations? For the past three millenia?

          • sidor

            3000 years ago there were three (including Egypt). Then two of them disappeared. Now again we have two. Try to comprehend why Syria and Lebanon (as well as Armenia and Mesopotamia) ally with Iran. The problem of the Israeli government is that they don’t know the answer, and don’t understand what is going on.

  • Bonkim

    Talking about sexuality is waste of time – like religion it should be ones private affair and no one else wants or needs to know what you are – don’t care.

  • EasyStreet

    “I didn’t understand why. I still don’t. It’s not that I’m against justice for Palestine, but that wasn’t what I’d gone to march about. The connection between Israel and the Iraq war was so tenuous as to be nonexistent, but a strong streak of the Stop the War movement always wished it was stronger. When issues weren’t about Israel — and believe it or not, many aren’t — they always transparently wished they were.”

    Stop the War was and is a movement of the left. The opposition of many leftists to Israel stems not from antisemitism but from the equation of Zionism with colonialism; to them it’s a modern equivalent of the exploitation of Africa and Africans by white oppressors. Therefore protesting against Israel generally ranks high on the agenda of such folk, and tenuous opportunities such as Iraq 2003 will be taken. An academic analysis of the development of leftist anti-Israel thought, focussing on the role of Professor Edward Said’s writings, can be found here:

    http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/enough-said-false-scholarship-edward-said

  • Ambientereal

    Bisexuality is the negation of s.xu.lity. How can a person hesitate at the time of searching for a couple? If the fashion dictates that we must have as much fun as possible, that only fun counts, then fun has nothing to do with s.xu.lity. How do you call someone that likes s.x..dolls?

    • wildcolonialboy

      Your comment is completely incoherent. This has nothing to do with fashion, it’s the throwing off of millenia of Christian indoctrination.

      Bisexuality was the norm amongst the men of Ancient Greece and Rome; being attracted to women and “youths” (lads around 16-21) was considered the norm. Being purely attracted to one or the other was considered more of a fetish.

      When the Romans converted to Christianity and started cracking down on that kind of thing, their empire fell shortly thereafter. The rigid, closeted, enforced heterosexuality of Western Christendom is completely backward. Thank goodness we are progressing as a civilisation.

      • Ambientereal

        Oh! yes the problem was Christendom. What about Islam? India? China?

  • Solage 1386

    Anything to do with homosexuality, Jews, Israel, fox hunting, animal rights, healthy food, Princess Diana, Nazis, God, conspiracy theories, feminism, environmentalism, and so on, is guaranteed to bring out the Loons! Yawn. Time for another pink gin. Cheers.

  • Bonce

    The celebration of almost half of 18-24 not identifying as hetero, as some kind of progress, is truly the death throes of a once amazingly successful culture called European civilization. Meanwhile, muslims in France are having 8 children per female and are not interested in this self serving and morally bankrupt propaganda.

    This is not PROGRESS, this is REGRESSION, this is the death throes of European civilization. Bye Bye.

    Welcome to your islamic continent by 2050. And the old Europeans are all too gay to have kids.

  • ArtieHarris

    I think that the YouGov poll simply demonstrates that young people nowadays do not want to see themselves in black and white terms.

    Same goes for skin colour.

    So, they will not see themselves as dogmatically one thing rather than another.

    I’m not sure that this makes them bisexual though. It is just an awareness that sexuality is a continuum, and people do not wish to see themselves as being stuck at the very ends of it.

    • Callipygian

      What a load of bollocks. Put me on the orientation list as ‘hetero female, none other’.

      • ArtieHarris

        So, you’re in a minority. Good for you.

        • Callipygian

          Actually, I don’t believe I am.

          • Frank Marker

            Puts on best cod viennese guttural accent. ” I am afreud you need some serious therapy mein leibschen. As it appears to me you are suppressing your sapphic urges”. 😉

          • Callipygian

            Cackle!

  • TomV

    Who cares what other people are doing in the bedroom ?
    I am not interested and from my point the whole LB….. ‘discussion’ is blowing out of proportion.

  • evad666

    Good to see one local charity is being investigated by the local constabulary for committing a hate crime against transexuals.
    Their Crime suggesting a Charity event of a 5k race in drag for a children’s hospice.

  • NotImpressedbyTripe

    If 50% of “young people” in GB self-identify as bisexual, isn’t that just a roundabout way of saying no one is really very interested in young British males except other British males?

  • Hades2

    be careful rational people in the reading of this thread.
    It may have a deleterious effect on your intelligence
    its swarming with religious fundamentalists, closeted homosexuals, pretentious right wing pseudo intellectuals and general all round dimwits

    hahahaha

  • Roger Hudson

    Just a symptom of the sexualisation of society, usually for profit.
    Heterosexual men love women. Homosexual men love men. Bisexuals love sex.

  • Frank Marker

    Woody Allen isn’t probably the best person to quote about sex but I always remember this quote from him ‘ Bisexuality doubles your chances for a date on Saturday night.”

  • Syd Moore
  • sidor

    It is time to discuss legal discrimination of bisexuals.

    Indeed, the only way to legalise bisexual relations is to allow polygamy. The fact that both homosexual and heterosexual communities refuse to discuss it indicates a clear bi-phobia in the society. This should be eliminated by a media campaign and school education.

    I tried to raise this problem in the Guardian, and was brutally suppressed. The liberals don’t seem to be that liberal to the sexual minorities.

    • Ambientereal

      At parties you drink only alcoholic beverages, only non alcoholic ones or a little bit of everyone?

      • sidor

        Is it an expression of bi-phobia?

        • Ambientereal

          I drink a little bit of everything, I speak with everyone but I don´t want to be defined by the way I have my fun.

          • sidor

            In what way your drinking habit prevents you from recognising the human rights of bisexual minority to have a legally recognised family?

          • Ambientereal

            Bisexuality is a way of having fun not a way of building a family.

          • sidor

            You promiscuous attitude cannot justify rejection of legitimate rights of bisexual people to form legally recognised families.

          • Ambientereal

            The day will come, when the shepherd will marry his sheep

          • sidor

            How true. This kind of sexual relation should also be legalised as a family. Tolerance is universal.

  • Precambrian

    It just shows that if propagandise people with relativism long enough they stop being able to know what they are.

  • KilowattTyler

    Of course, only a cynic would suggest that claiming to be ‘bisexual’ allows one to appear avant garde whilst still displaying heterosexual behaviour, whereas stating that you are ‘homosexual’ is a bit too definite for this.

Close