Dear, oh, dear, oh dear….

What exactly is this supposed to prove? Science is “interfering with nature”? Please Hank, you really need to do better, its distressing to watch you feebly trying to complete with knowledge and wisdom.

Common sense tells us that there is no global conspiracy by gay people or a “new world order”. Yet you hold that paranoid belief to be true. You spouted here a 6,000 year old earth. Yet it is proven beyond irrefutable doubt to be a silly story, believed by the weak minded and the foolish.

Just because you don’t understand science Hank, really counts for nothing in the slightest. You fear science, BECAUSE you don’t understand it. Science threatens the proof-less belief system you hold so dear. You’ve proven you unable to listen, unable to learn, and your mind is limited by schizophrenic paranoia. Your grasp on science consists of a few cut and pastes from sources with zero credibility.

Hardly one to be telling us, people who are above and better educated then you, about common sense and science, now, are you?

Science hopes to change events that have already occurred
January 21, 2007, San Francisco Chronicle/New Scientist magazine
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/01/21/ING5LNJSBF1.DTL

Common sense tells us that influencing the past is impossible — what’s done is done, right? Even if it were possible, think of the mind-bending paradoxes it would create. While tinkering with the past, you might change the circumstances by which your parents met, derailing the key event that led to your birth. Such are the perils of retrocausality, the idea that the present can affect the past, and the future can affect the present. Strange as it sounds, retrocausality … has been debated for decades, mostly in the realm of philosophy and quantum physics. Trouble is, nobody has done the experiment to show it happens in the real world, so the door remains wide open for a demonstration. It might even happen soon.

Researchers are on the verge of experiments that will finally hold retrocausality’s feet to the fire by attempting to send a signal to the past. It should all be doable with the help of a state-of-the-art optics workbench and the bizarre yet familiar tricks of quantum particles. If retrocausality is confirmed — and that is a huge if — it would overturn our most cherished notions about the nature of cause and effect and how the universe works.

There’s so much mind-boggling topics on the internet. Thought
somebody on this site would enjoy this also.

I hear you…. I’m beginning to see some Tory supporters as more religious than logical! Quite disturbing.

Hmmm. A profound thought, Will. I think I agree with it!

And Jesus, Mary, Joseph, and Mad Mohammed, is there not a lot of vicious English Tory hysteria on some of these threads at the moment!? Some of the claims our gullible gay Establishment-lovers have made are either the product of totally gaga loopy hysteria or the most cunning and devilish conniving! Either way they are exploited deluded fools.

Essentially, if its not a mental health issue with these two, its down to fear of death approaching and an unhealthy dose of powerlessness.

At #67 Hank referred to rational academics working in gender theory and then stated “These two people don’t impress me as being unbiased and totally objective in their views” without even so much as saying a SINGLE WORD as to why he was not impressed!

He cannot even perceive how laughable that action is.

Looks like “Big Brother” keeps expanding everyday in every way. But most of you don’t care to look deeper into what and how our society is changing its standards and principles – but not to be surprised, because it’s foretold if you know where to look.

What do think of this?

“Crackdown on dangerous dogs to make microchips compulsory for all
March 9, 2010, The Guardian (One of the UK’s leading newspapers)

“All dogs are to be compulsorily microchipped so that their owners can be more easily traced under a crackdown on dangerous dogs. Under the scheme a microchip the size of a grain of rice is injected under the skin of the dog between its shoulder blades. The chip contains a unique code number, the dog’s name, age, breed and health as well as the owner’s name, address and phone number. When the chip is “read” by a handheld scanner the code number is revealed and the details can be checked on a national database.

“The measures will be set out by the home secretary, Alan Johnson, who will point to rising public concern that “status dogs” are being used by some irresponsible owners to intimidate communities or as a weapon by gangs. If the scheme were made compulsory owners would face a fine for failing to microchip their dogs.”

Note: Once all dogs are required to be microchipped, what will come next? Might “Big Brother” be looking at us so we can’t act like “dangerous dogs?”

Today, I send the following comment, which again reveals another attempt of your “intolerance” towards the general public – trying to control speech today , and tomorrow, it’ll be trying to control “anti-homosexual thoughts.” “Big Brother” is growing and our government is being duped into carrying out “1984″ as the world gets more desperate and perverted.

“Mass. Senate: Watch Your Language!
After a series of tragic teen suicides, the Massachusetts legislature is considering an anti-bullying bill that would put a greater emphasis on the problem in local schools.

Last week, the state senate passed the proposal unanimously-but not before pro-family groups exposed a devious scheme in the bill. At the last minute, the Senate Education Committee stripped language that could have criminalized anyone who criticized homosexuality. Specifically, S.2283 said that whoever promoted “false material” to promote “hatred” of any group because of their “sexual orientation” could be fined up to a $1,000 or sentenced to a year in jail.

Depending on how state officials defined these terms, the legislation could have had a crippling effect on free speech and religious liberty. MassResistance pointed out how extreme the language is and managed to have leaders remove it. Although the end result was a victory for conservatives, it does illustrate the real agenda of homosexual activists–which is to completely silence those who are critical of their behavior, by force of law, if necessary.”

Love the way Hank and Skinner both share that cut’n'paste level of individual thinking…. seems to be the modus operandi of the diminished capacity class of schizophrenic.

Little Hank, your indoctrinated brain, full of received garbage (garbage received from texts penned by primitive and ignorant peoples), is not capable of unravelling and comprehending the work of these two thinkers, so you could not possibly even BEGIN to prove that there work is not objective.

THEY are original THINKERS.

YOU are NOT an original thinker. YOU parrot the fearful garbage of ancient and ignorant peoples.

THEY are brave.

YOU are a programmed and pathetic automaton.

You do, however, have the option of wiping your brain of all that garbage and starting afresh.

Don’t bother selecting and deleting, Little Hank: just reformat your entire brain and then install a modern and rational operating system.

You could become a happy person!

Not some sad fuc*er who has to inhabit gay websites venting the cancer that gnaws at his heart.

They don’t spend their time in gay sites preaching about the “end of days” and a “new world order” conspiracies involving elaborate and ludicrous conspiracies, do they Hank?

You do.

Now who do you think might “have the problem”, eh?

I know what closet case homophobe I’m going to pick.

They seem to have the problem…not me.

No, lets be honest here. The study in question shows that its MOST PROBABLE you’re a closet case homosexual. It explains your obsession with us. It also explains why you are here so often. It establishes why you are SO desperate to prove yourself “straight”. Every protest you make here cements that belief.

Good night.

What kind of world are you living in Jean P? Interest in sex is
everywhere ….all the time…I could give you thousands of
examples, but the 3 below are typical of how sex has permeated
our society — get used to it — it’s probably the most viewed
and discussed topic these days worldwide.

By Nancy McAlister
Times-Union television writer,

PASADENA, Calif. – Don’t expect the folks on Friends and Veronica’s Closet to take vows of celibacy. But viewers may find future NBC shows have fewer sexcapades, particularly the extramarital variety.

Less gratuitous sex and more traditional families are part of the prime-time vision of new NBC entertainment chief Scott Sassa. In his first news conference as the network’s top programmer, Sassa said he’d like to see a little more balance in what NBC does, including presenting more households like Mad About You with a mother, father and children.

”We need to have less of an emphasis on sex,” Sassa said, praising the prolonged, unresolved sexual tension on the classic sitcom Cheers. ”For the most part, when sex is used in a smart way, it works out OK. In some cases, I think we could use a few more words in between ‘Hello’ and ‘Would you sleep with me?’ We need to figure out how to use sex appropriately and responsibly.”

MUSIC AND SEX:

A study of the lyrics of popular music was conducted to test the hypothesis that from the 1950s through the 1970s such songs placed a progressively greater emphasis upon physical as opposed to emotional love.

Researchers analyzed the lyrics of the five most popular songs listed in “Billboard” magazine during every year from 1950 to 1980.

2.7% of the songs released during the 1950s were rated “somewhat” or “very” physical, while 11.4% of those from the 1960s and 40% of those songs released during the 1970s were so rated.

Love songs published during the 1950s and early 1960s often described persons yearning for their first love or the rapture of a couple’s first encounter. Their romantic love was associated with dreams, hearts, and sacrifice, and portrayed as exclusive, true, and eternal.

During the 1960s, lyrics became more ambiguous, and sexual desire became a more dominant theme.

By the 1970s, the traditional values were broadened: persons described in modern love songs often met, spent a single night together, then parted without any emotional bond or commitment. Today even songs with the most explicit lyrics become number one hits.

SEX IN DESIGN

Sex in Design/Design in Sex to open at the Museum of Sex on January 31, 2008: Exhibition Will Highlight the Best Sexually Inspired Contemporary Designs From Around the World
New York, NY- November 2007- The Museum of Sex is proud to announce the opening of its thirteenth exhibition on January 31, 2008. Entitled Sex in Design/Design in Sex, this exhibition will be showcased in a gallery created by Pentagram Design, Inc. and will be on view through April 2008.

Design has the power to shape experience; lending intensity to sexual encounters and adding a sensual thrill to everyday objects. From subtle manifestations to overt declarations, sexual imagery appeals to the universal human desire for pleasure. Sex in Design/Design in Sex highlights the best and most compelling sexually inspired contemporary designs from around the world.

Jean P….you can’t pick up a magazine without the feature article emphasizing SEX….look at how many television programs deal with “jumping into bed” on the first date….politicians
and world leaders committing adultery…etc. Get with the times!!! I’d appreciate your response to my examples.

Theorists including Calvin Thomas (professor at Georgia State University) and Judith Butler (American post-structuralist philosopher) have suggested that homophobia can be rooted in an individual’s fear of being identified as gay. Homophobia in men is correlated with insecurity about masculinity”

MY COMMENT: After reading about your “experts on homophobia” I
think their emphasis and engrossment on sex goes far beyond
anything I come close to with an interest in sexual behavior that seems to concern you.

Would you care to give your opinion as to the (sexual identification, sexual preference, etc.) of these two people as to offering an unbiased view in their writings?

Here’s a brief view of your two people:

Department of English
Calvin Thomas
Ph.D., University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 1990
Professor and Director of Graduate Studies
Literary Theory and Cultural Studies

Dr. Thomas works in critical theory and modern and postmodern literature and culture. His research involves feminist, psychoanalytic, and deconstructive interrogations of gender, sexuality, and the body.

His study Male Matters: Masculinity, Anxiety, and the Male Body on the Line examines repressions of the male body in social constructions of normative masculinity and the role played by writing–as material act or “bodily function”–in the disruption of gendered identity.

. Long interested in the relation of men to feminism, Dr. Thomas is also concerned with the implications of “straight” negotiations with queer theory, and his co-edited volume Straight with a Twist: Queer Theory and the Subject of Heterosexuality examines this contestatory terrain.

His latest book is called Masculinity, Psychoanalysis, Straight Queer Theory: Essays on Abjection in Literature, Mass Culture, and Film (Palgrave-Macmillan,2008).

Dr. Thomas is a Research Affiliate of the Centre for the Interdisciplinary Study of Sexuality and Gender in Europe, University of Exeter, UK.

Some published works include:
Male Matters=Straight with aTwist =Masculinity,Psychoanalysis,StraightQueerTheory

Masculinity, Psychoanalysis, Straight Queer Theory: Essays on Abjection in Literature, Mass Culture, and Film (Palgrave-Macmillan,2008).

Male Matters: Masculinity, Anxiety, and the Male Body on the Line (University of Illinois Press, 1996)

Straight with a Twist: Queer Theory and the Subject of Heterosexuality, editor, with Joseph Aimone and Catherine MacGillivray (University of Illinois Press, 2000).

MY COMMENT: Regarding Judith Butler, I offer the following:

Quoting “Im Ok-Hee, author of the book Reading Judith Butler, 2006 and also co-representative from The Center for Women’s Culture and Theory came to Korea University (KU) for five days to give lectures on Butler’s theories.”

She, notes:

“Judith Butler: Born in 1956 and have received Ph.D. in philosophy from Yale University, Butler is a prominent American post-structuralist philosopher of fields such as feminism, queer theory and political philosophy. She is currently professor in the departments of Rhetoric and Comparative Literature at the University of California, Berkeley.

“So, who is Judith Butler and what are her theories? “In short, she is someone who gave a clear theory on gender problems,” said Im.

“In a world where heterosexuality dominates all sexual relations and leaves other alternatives as abnormalities, Butler suggested a new paradigm regarding gender and sex through a concept called gender performativity. Compared to former feminist theories involving race, class, and sex, Butler’s theory opened feminism to focus more on gender.

“The core of her theory is that sex and sexuality is not fixed in each individual, but is performed voluntarily. According to Butler, gender is literally free floating and any individual is capable of performing any gender one wants. “Butler’s discourse on sexual identity is not limited to race, class and sex, but more radically dismantled towards the concept of gender,” said Im.

WILL: You need to do better!
I’ll need more scientifically qualified people for commenting on the homophobia/homosexual relationship. These two people don’t
impress me as being unbiased and totally objective in their views.

Nail on the head, JP…. and I am amazed just how many studies here are to back up this statement. I have to thanks Hank, he’s opened my eyes…. next time I see a homophobe, I’ll have to do the old cliché of “keeping by back to the wall”