Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
This is a generational thing. If I were 20, I might call myself transgender and queer because of the labeling phenomena. But I don't need to label myself. Just accept myself, and I do. That is the real problem of being 20. Parental pressure, peer pressure, internal struggles. Who do I want to be and how can I be happy as that person?
I. understand the impetus, though, because people want to be accepted by similar people, so they're raising their "freak" flags, as they used to say. (Let your freak flag fly!)
Youth are hanging out these shingles... BUT, here's the rub. You might feel one way at 19 and quite another by 25. Adolescence is the stage of experimentation and discovery.
I did my experimenting and though I might be considered queer and transgender because of the way I dress and how I think, I also decided I'm solely attracted to men. Won't be a LOT of men who'll like ME, but hey, we don't choose our personalities. We're born as we are, for the most part.
I don't think I'm much different from the child I was at 4. All I have is more experience and more book knowledge. And patience. The gift of age is patience. Good luck all!
Girls won’t eat another girl out/date one but they will say they’re bisexual because they think Rihanna is hot. I really feel like a lot of people are rushing to label themselves to fit in
What does that mean 15% of them are women? What's the figure for men?
Are you suggesting there's a lot more bi women than by men, for example? Because it seems a lot of women would be happy to call themselves bi, not so many men. Women obviously find women a lot more desirable than men these days.
Anyway, to each their own.
Although I admit I find the gender identity part a bit odd. Sexuality is one thing. But gender identity. I mean, strictly speaking, inwardly, I probably have more female qualities than male. I'm empathetic, nurturing etc is important to me. Like I can't say I see myself as some testosterone laden man. My gender identity, I just don't give a shit. I am what I am. So why do I need to label myself? Sorry it's not PC, but with 100s of millions being plunged into further food poverty, and sky high energy, food and housing prices seeping into the West, possibly with food shortages also. Let's see how much this gender identity bollocks matters when you're starving.
15% of the 21% as stated are women
Mental illness is running rampant
@Toast792 I know you did not just type "uwu" after talking about personal experience with mental illness 💀💀
Opinion
108Opinion
u I do not trust that claim. Just think about it: Are one out of every five of your friends LGBTQ?
None of my friends or colleagues are LGBTQ.
nope, all straight
Many of them are, yes. Obviously conservative people will have far less (or likely zero) LGBTQ friends. We all live in our social bubbles.
The problem with that question is there are still a lot of people who are in the closet, so you may not actually know how many LGBTQ friends, or people you know, who are actually gay, bi, etc. They are probably more likely to answer on an anon survey than to tell people in their lives.
I identify as bi, but didn't dare be honest with myself until I came around to how absurd my gay hating Christian fundamentalist religion was. Our generation was afraid to be honest with themselves and frequently married to help them hide or convince themselves they are straight. Most of the guys my age I've slept with were widowers or divorcees. Most of these gen-z lgbt persons admit they are mostly, not 100% straight. For our generation anyone who was less than completely straight could easily suppress it. It just wasn't worth the risk.
@MountAverage Not all of us live in homogenous bubbles.
It's not so much an increase in those who identify a gay or lesbian. It's that they are more likely to admit it when they are not totally straight. They are much more likely to realize that the idea of sexual orientation being a binary is a myth. When we were kids it was dangerous to admit you felt same sex attraction. Why risk it if you were also attracted to the opposite sex? //Additionally, our data also shows that 57% of Gen Z agree “Most people’s sexual orientation falls somewhere in between straight or gay,” and they more likely than Millennials to disagree with the statement, “You are either straight or gay, there is no in-between.”// www.advocate.com/.../study-says-only-two-thirds-gen-z-straight
@wagsingle Young people, from many generations previously to present, have always been eager to "admit" or "confess" that which the MSM told them was socially acceptable. My generation did it with kids becoming hippies and protesting against the war, and later joinging the bourgeoisie. What young people prefess to be and what they actually are is far from clear and not always congruent.
Of course not, complete homogeny would be hard to achieve, unless you live in some kind of community. But we still all live in some kind of social bubble. Of course they're heterogenous, but we still obviously (deliberately or not) create bubble of people that are at least somehow compatible with our core values. Someone who is strongly opposed to LGBTQ people will most likely not have any as friends. That's just pretty obvious.
All I'm saying is that our personal, individual social circles don't reflect overall population statistics. I don't know if the numbers in the question are accruate, since the Asker didn't provide a source. But there are actual, credible statistics out there. Our circles of friends don't say much. I have a fairly heterogenous circle of friends, still it doesn't mean that's reflective of overall society. I don't have friends who are religious fundamentalists, for instance, yet that doesn't mean that there are many of them out there.
@MountAverage "Someone who is strongly opposed to LGBTQ people will most likely not have any as friends. That's just pretty obvious." I am opposed to most of the beliefs that characterize the LGBTQ community but I do not try to control what they do with themselves behind closed doors. And I attend a church whch is known for being LGBTQ friendly and we have a fair number of lesbians and homosexuals who are members and attend on a regular basis.
Not sure how that's relevant. My whole point is exactly that single anectdotes are irrelevant when it comes to statistics of whole populations. But also, when I say "strongly opposed to" I'm talking about actual raging homophobes.
Not sure what's so controversial about what I'm saying. All I'm saying is your or my circle of friends aren't reflective of the population. That's a pretty uncontroversial statement.
Actual statistics usually show a number somewhere in the are of around up to 10%, so I too believe the number in the question is unrealistic.
@MountAverage I understand everything you are saying, but this began with your statement, “ We all live in our social bubbles.”. That’s an over generalization.
And we don't work in our social bubble.
@MountAverage Stats indicate about 15% of the population of the planet is gay or lesbian. About 2 percent transgender. I don't recall bisexual numbers. And by trans I mean people who feel they are in the wrong sexual body. Not people who are crossdressers, drag queens or kings. That's all I know.
@wagsingle The other possibility is that all of @Squaresquirrel 's friends are normal heterosexuals.
@wagsingle I never said anyone should care, but apparently you do.
The statement "we all live in our social bubbles" can easily be misinterpreted, I get that. I should have been more specific. A "social bubble" is not an isolated community or something, it just means we all tend to choose to associate ourselves far more with people who share certain core values with us. That's not really a generalization, that's just basic human nature. Sure, our circles of friends might be quite heterogenous (mine sure is), but that's still within certain lines. Those lines will be different for everyone, of course, but we all have them one way or another.
But that's drifting too far from the main topic, so let's leave it at that.
#Pull your kids out of public school...
#something is wrong
I hope they are thankful to all those who've faught for the country, for freedoms, liberty... are willing to take up arms and oppose oppression which exists in other countries. They should be on the front lines and volunteer for military service if they haven't already. Maybe they could "man" a pink aircraft carrier for peace? I hope they stop imposing their corrupt thinking on others who don't want it.
We should study what the heck influences these... distortions. If we were talking about wild bears... male bears mating with male bears, taking other bears cubs as their own because they can't make them, females mating with females being frustrated they cannot produce offspring... we'd be concerned, we'd spend a billion to figure out what is wrong, you know how mad the Clintons would be and fight for that billion? for the bears could go extinct. But here we have humans doing this and we think nothing of it. Something is screwed up...
... possibly intentional, or by side effect environmental, or just nature.
it's their life...
Yeah that’s bollox.
recent census data etc shows an increase, however it’s still low.
These are UK stats, not some thing of the internet.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/sexuality/bulletins/sexualidentityuk/2019
Quote
The proportion of the UK population aged 16 years and over identifying as heterosexual or straight decreased from 94.6% in 2018 to 93.7% in 2019.
An estimated 2.7% of the UK population aged 16 years and over identified as lesbian, gay or bisexual (LGB) in 2019, an increase from 2.2% in 2018.
Between 2018 and 2019, the number of men identifying as LGB increased from 2.5% to 2.9% and women identifying as LGB increased from 2.0% to 2.5%.
Younger people (aged 16 to 24 years) were most likely to identify as LGB in 2019 (6.6% of all 16 to 24 year olds, an increase from 4.4% in 2018); older people (aged 65 years and over) also showed an increase in those identifying as LGB, from 0.7% to 1.0% of this age category.
Between 2018 and 2019, the proportion of people who identified as LGB increased for England (2.7%, up from 2.3%) and Scotland (2.7%, up from 2.0%), however Wales (2.9%) and Northern Ireland (1.3%) remained stable; among English regions, people in London were most likely to identify as LGB (3.8%, an increase from 2.8%).
this will I guess be the same around the world.
Many of us are no longer threatened by violent ignorance, and we feel safe when honestly reporting who we are. Many people can finally see through the falsehoods of religion, and can see the universe for what we can actually prove. Even many of those who believe in a deity incorporating reality can see that the facts are straight forward, if teleology exists, and some creative force shaped our reality, then it made sexuality more complex than religions have been able to explain.
Scientific rigor in both the social and biological sciences have revealed a complex set of images (in the Platonic sense, see below) that we can use to describe the many possible feelings/impulses that we have. This has given many people the ability to understand and describe precisely what they identify as.
So, for probably the first time in human history, many of us have the knowledge (vocabulary), and we have the freedom to accurately express our sexual orientation and gender identification. We will most likely become more accurate as time goes on, as more people are free to be honest about who they are.
an overly optimistic statement that in and of itself is almost like a religious sermon
the truth is, humans are not capable of rationality. they MUST have a religion. all humans have a religion, all humans will find a faith to believe in. genderism and labeling one's sexuality is just what your generation replaced Christianity with.
The difference is Christianity is evolutionarily very beneficial, it promotes a high birth rate, emotional resillience with faith in an afterlife, and responsibility to a large community. While this new sexuality labeling genderism promotes smaller and smaller communities and emotional stress and insular thinking.
They're both religions, you're no more rational than the people burning witches at the stake
@Zenit93 Your first argument relies upon the idea that since some scientists made a mistake, the scientific process is not trust worthy. This argument can be applied to all religions as well, and to all actions taken by a human or group of humans.
I will give you a general religious example, then a Christian specific one.
Example 1. How can you trust your religion, when there are so many cults that are either products of psychosis, or are products of greed? Religions along with their followers are not to ever be trusted.
Example 2. How can you trust your religion and Jesus when there was that cult that carried out the Jonestown Massacre? Because of that cult, no one should trust the words of Jesus, or followers of Jesus.
Of course, arguments with that structure are obviously faulty, because you are saying that a group of psychologists represents every application of the scientific method. It is like saying that every congregation is represented by Rev. Jim Jones and his people. Simply because a group of psychologists incorrectly applied the scientific method, does not mean that the scientific method cannot be used to accurately gather evidence. Simply because one congregation was involved in an absolutely heinous act, does not mean that all congregations will do the same.
@Zenit93 We are at a critical point, I am about to reveal why I trust science, and why the scientific method is a far better method for understanding reality than any religion.
It is because in science, peer review exists. Scientists do not actually trust each other and our findings, we treat each other with great scrutiny. This is why Electroconvulsive therapy is no longer used in the same way, not because religious people found a cure for mental illness by praying and using the Bible, but because other scientists used the scientific method to understand reality.
And you misunderstand my trust, as it is not blind faith, unlike your religious faith. I am educated, and I can interpret statistical findings. I do not trust every claim by every supposed scientist, as you do not join every religion. I read the data, how they used statistics as evidence, I review all of their evidence, and then I can easily decide if it is coherent or not. In science, arguments can be made, and evidence questioned. In your religion, the evidence cannot be questioned because you blindly accept every word in your book as definitive evidence. Your Bible is wrong about the origin of the Cosmos, we have evidence that it took far longer than 7 days for the known universe and the Earth to form. And what is your defense? You question our evidence without having the knowledge to use our tools. You say, "Well, you don't know for sure. The Bible could be right." So, where's the Bible's evidence for anything?
@Zenit93 And yes, humans are fallible, we are with fault, scientists make mistakes, and some serve their greed, their ego, or just themselves. This is also true about religion. For pastors, priests, and anyone in your congregation.
As for why the scientific method is such a better tool than your Bible for finding the truth, well, lets talk about what we actually trust them with. I trust the scientific method to be a process that gives me a chance of finding the truth through repeated measurements of the same value. That is all. I do not trust the scientific method to tell how the Cosmos came into being. I do not trust the scientific method to explain how we can exist in between infinite time before us, and infinite time after us. I do not trust the scientific method to tell me how everything got here. Knowledge has limits, and measurements can be beyond our scope.
Now let us compare our library of books, spanning every area of investigation and discovery, with your book. I am going to look at what your book is good for, and what our book is good for.
You are using several devices of amazing value to communicate with me on this forum. I challenge you to use the information in your Bible to build 3 computers from raw materials to recreate this website: your computer, my computer, and the host computer, so that we may communicate on your religion built internet. If you try this, you and your congregation will be praying and reading the Bible for generations with nothing to show for it. You will not ever finish the hardware, let alone the software required to advance a single step. Apparently, if there is a deity, it does not work this way.
@Zenit93
The Bible does not contain information concerning integrated circuits and multilayered circuit boards. That is what I can trust science with, we can progressively understand our reality, pass our findings to the next generation, and eventually build amazing things.
The Bible is not used for this, it is not good at progressively creating an accurate depiction of how the world works. It just has statements with no evidence based testing. All of the evidence is in scientific books, and our findings make religion look depressingly useless.
I work in finance as an economist. I'm as stoic and as skeptical as they come. There are a lot more consistencies in scripture than what you're saying. I've spent ten years of my life laughing at Christians and attempted to dismantle everything I read in the bible. If you're an intellectual, then might I suggest reading Frank Tipler's work. Then read "The Case for Christ". Then you should actually attempt to read the gospel.
@Zenit93 As for your use of statistics, I am well versed in debunking the misuse of statistical procedures, and analyzing the misinterpretation of evidence.
What you just did is far from what scientists do when they analyze statistics, and use statistics as a tool to understand the world. What you are proposing has been proven false decades ago, literally. This is the golden nugget within the scientific method, we read each other's findings, and progressively build from what we find. We have peer review, we read all or almost all of the material concerning a topic before proposing a hypothesis concerning how the world works.
I implore you, enroll in your local Junior College, or join a library that has access to research databases. You can look this question up, and find out how your hypothesis has been debunked years ago.
The findings I have come across during past research points directly to the Christian community and their baseless beliefs as being the core cause of depression and mental illness within the LGBTQI+ communities. Homosexuals have an impulsive, harmless part of their identity treated like a plague or an evil by heretics who cannot even follow the simplest of tenets given to them by their own savior, treat others as you would like to be treated. Judge not, less you be judged first. Love each other, as I have loved you.
@Zenit93 It is absolutely disgusting how His words have been heard and completely disregarded by those who represent His name. We can eat pork now because Jesus said so, but the one about treating each other well, disregard that one. "Jesus didn't send a rug with gay people down on it and tell Peter to love them too, so you know, we can't accept them."
Unbelievable how entire groups cannot put that piece together, how much more important is a gay person's ability to be free, and have their romantic life private? How much more important is it to let them know that they are loved and accepted, than it is to eat pork. So disgusting.
And a heads up, God made them gay.
We all have our struggles in life. My biggest sin is greed. Does that mean I just embrace what's natural to me and base all of my life chasing money and status? Some people are born with an inherent problem toward addiction. Do we just give them copious amounts of opiates and tell them to live their best life? No. I struggle with the sin, and actively detest it. Sinners are accepted, but the sin is not.
Do you think scripture warns us of homosexuality for a reason? As I stated before, there's a a lot of correlation regarding homosexuality and depression. I think it makes sense that someone who's homosexual would become depressed. They cannot procreate. They cannot experience the diverse dynamic that a man and women would bring into a marriage.
I don't need to enroll at a community college lol. I have a Bachelor's and MS in Mechanical Engineering, and another Masters in Economics. I got about 10 years on you. scholar. google and other databases provide plenty of information. Centralized data-bases are limited. You're hitting me with a myriad of points, and I'm not sure which to address. People misinterpret the bible all the time. That's how cults are formed.
@007kingifrit What portion of what I said was optimistic? How does optimism play a role in the variables I layed out for you? And for a "stoic" "economist" who thinks that he is well read in Christian apologetics, you sure rely upon your lack of rationality to rationalize your way into telling me that you read books that you think are important, and that they taught you the special importance of Christianity. Your viewpoint on the issue is flushed with rigor by Max Weber in "The Protestant Ethic and The Spirit of Capitalism" and Emile Dirkhiem's works on this issue are what I recommend to you. Their works are the product and focus of true academic rigor. I implore you to also read the counter arguments.
Your ideas concerning social upheaval due to embracing a sexuality based characteristic is lacking proper analysis. There are possible third variables all over the place, the most blatant possibility being that in general, the Christian community's views can easily be the cause of the lack of unity, being that they do not accept these newly defined community members.
@007kingifrit As for your social psychological assessment that it promotes "emotional stress" and decrementing community populations is, well once again, not properly analyzed. See my past point concerning the blaring existence of the aforementioned third variable. A variable that has already been powerfully linked to the issues that we are concerned with.
This the product of professional philosophy.
See, we all have read books.
And your personal journey, or lack thereof in the topic at hand, is irrelevant concerning the structure of my claim, which is the correlation of dwindling religious associations, and the rise of diversity in my cohorts description of their sexuality. I recommend an academically tested author by the name of Irving Goffman, who does a fine job of laying your argument concerning sexual identity to rest. A professional and time tested social philosopher concerning this issue.
@007kingifrit You posit that humans "MUST" have a religion, but then you obviously use a definition of religion than what has been established in the past and present. Pick up a dictionary, or better yet, pick up a sociology 101 book and read the definition of religion in the back. It's just a shortcut to a concise and unequivocal definition of the phrase. I'm not a sociologist, I just know that they have the actual definition that I though everyone already knew through common sense.
I mentioned the issues that science cannot answer, but guess what? Religion only answers these questions with no proof. I could make up anything I wanted concerning an answer to those questions, and my hypothesis would be as valid as your religion's. Your religion provides no proof, especially concerning physical reality.
As for Biblical consistencies, well, name some. Show me the many ways that your religion is not completely heretical to itself.
@007kingifrit Sorry, most of that wasn't meant for you.
@Zenit93 Your degree has nothing to do with social philosophy and religion, you are less than a freshman concerning that information. You should know how to conduct proper research, so actually do it. You should be ashamed that someone with a master's degree cannot do simple social science research on such a prolific topic. Enroll again to gain access to the databases and do proper social philosophy.
Why would we use the Bible to make an iPhone? Why would you use the Bible to explain sexual identity and sexual orientation, it's not a book on biology? Apparently that point went right over your well-educated head. I'll spell it out plainly for you, science has the domain over such knowledge, not your make believe book.
The scripture warns you about homosexuality because it is a book of nonsense. For a stoic philosopher, you're doing a lot of guess work trying to justify why your book has rules with no explanation. This is the danger of dogmatic beliefs, you are literally , with your own words, separating yourself from the LGBTQI+ community. You are the one who is decreasing the size of our you are shrinking your community, factually at this very moment. You are telling these people that they are evil. You are the proof.
Let go of the dogma, let go of the evil that turns you against your siblings, and accept people for who they are. Accept them for how God made them. God does not want you to turn them into objects of evil. You must use your own mind, and reason for yourself. Jesus would want you to treat those who are different like He treated the prostitutes and the tax collectors. Eat with them, share with them, and love them.
@007kingifrit Sorry, I meant most of that for @Zenit93.
I agree with what you are saying, that scientific work is not the concerned with ethics and morals.
I also agree that religion has many uses in terms of group action, helping the poor, and general good works.
My issue has nothing to do you any of your points, my point is that religion's domain has nothing to do with science, like biological sciences, and yo should look towards biology for answers concerning biological questions.
You're speaking in a lot of baseless generalities acting as if you have a patent on logical reasoning and science. I too favor science and logic, and my argument is the two can coincide. I don't go to the bible to learn how to design a CAD model in the same I don't go to a dictionary for learn how to solve derivatives. It makes no logical sense. The bible is a book of philosophy and morals. Not a book to teach you how to manufacture iPhones or learning technical analysis in markets. If you want to speak on logical principles, let's discuss promiscuity and the negative ramifications on marriage. Let's talk about the endocrine system and discuss how considering our assigned sex a spectrum is entirely irrational. Let's stop speaking in generalities tagged with baseless hints of patronizing superiority. I break down statistics and numbers for living. Choose one of the topics, and let's get to it. After concluding, I'll showcase the context matter as related to scripture. You're talking about hot-air, yet you're demonstrating a whole lot of nothing burgers. I say let's talk and you reply-- logic is logic. I concur. Where do we go next?
"The scripture warns you about homosexuality because it is a book of nonsense." - Give me a more eloquent response than this. This has no base that involves depth in the subject matter, and no logical reasoning. This simply says, I'm right and you're wrong because you're stupid. I know you're 19, but I'm sure you can do better than this.
@youngmix that's a dramatic reduction in what you said in the original post. you talked about science like the end all to all problems.
biology has very few answers on the subject of sexuality, it's mostly the pseudoscientists the "social scientists" pretending their work is legitimate and empirical... it isn't.
no it isn't normal that 21% of people claim to be sexually deviant in some capacity, and no you can't just come up with a theory and assume it is true (that it's just more accepted now) that's satisficion. humans don't just come out 1/5 gay. it's obviously social manipulation as evidenced by all the social engineered pushes to include it in all our stuff and make it trendy
this is dangerous because society depends on intolerance to function. democracy depends on compromise to work but comprmise is only possible if we are all similar enough where we have middle ground to meet on. introduce more and more people and identities into the mainstream and it starts to fall apart as each group pursues it's own internal interests.
@Zenit93 Once again, your job is irrelevant. You keep throwing it around like it makes you a great thinker. How you make your living does not automatically make your arguments logical.
The Bible is not a magic book of special logic, it is a bunch of lies that even you don't take literally. For some reason, you feel the need to preserve it like it has some perfect message, but it's just filled with non-sense like, "kill men who have sex with other men." Why? well it won't give you a reason, you can make that up as you go. And "don't eat pig." Why? Well, you know the drill. Make it up as you go. And "this guy lived hundreds of years." Proof? Why?, and "everything was made in seven days, or 6 really. God just chilled on the 7th." Proof? We don't do that. And "there was a huge flood that killed everything but a pair of each creature on an impossibly small ship", and the simple illogical existence of Adam and Eve's family, and the list goes on and on.
Book of nonsense.
You have to bend over backwards to justify evil parts of your religion, because you are too weak and cowardly to stand up and say that it is wrong to hate, to treat others horribly. You are the problem, you are the destruction of the community. Just accept others for who they are, and reject the evil parts of your book that is filled to the brim with nonsense.
And you have yet to pick a single variable that I laid out for you in the original hypothesis.
You're a supposed professional data scientist, so it should not be hard to pick the premises that I have, name one, and argue against it. They are just variables.
If it's too hard for you, I can lay it out in bits that you can chew on.
And by the way, you know your argument is terrible when you cite another adults age without knowing their credentials, nor their current occupation.
@Zenit93 @007kingifrit
I think you've lost yourself in your own ego, your job doesn't automatically make you or your religion logical. So, let's lay it out:
We have found that people can identify their own sexuality and sexual preferences in more ways than we had previously imagined.
The youngest generation, which is also one of the least religious, defines their sexuality and sexual orientation in a more diverse way.
I am saying that the issue is that your religion treats non-heterosexuals as evil, and you have suppressed the LGBTQI+ community for generations, because of your dogmatic beliefs.
I am also saying that being free from such dogmatic beliefs has allowed my generation to more openly define who they are, because they live without the various threats that your religion creates for them, including isolation.
I am also saying that we have recently discovered these many new phrases, that we now use to very precisely define our sexual orientation and sexuality. And that because these phrases have become available to us, we can use them to define ourselves accurately, which we are.
Scientific progress and work in the social sciences undoubtedly revealed these new ways to express ourselves.
As for the suppression of religion playing a role in the lack of expression, listen to your own words. "Unnatural", "evil". These are the words you use to describe someone's sexuality and sexual orientation. The LGBTQI+ community is not the one destroying the community, it is you and your religion's dogmatic acceptance of hatred.
@Zenit93 @007kingifrit
You don't need the Bible to have morals, although it does help some people find a great base to live their lives. Not everyone needs your book to be good people. I also do not believe that it is great to treat members of your community like they are evil because of their sexual orientation. I do appreciate that various Christian communities do good works, that is always great.
Other than that, I say get ready, because there are apparently many people who refuse to accept your religion as law. We do not care about your beliefs, we do not care about your faith, and we do not care about your deity. We also believe in God, and we believe that God loves us. We will not be treated like outcasts, and we will not be treated with hatred, and walk away silently.
You are the one's spreading hate. We just want equal rights.
You directly told me I don’t know how to conduct research or look at data when I literally do that for living. That’s why I found it relevant to mention it. It was a direct response. I’ve already stated that the Old Testament is not to be taken literally in response to you saying the earth was created in 7 days. It’s symbolic. You haven’t recognized what I said.
I again hate others because they’re gay. They are living a life of sin, but so am I. I simply don’t enable the sin. I love the sinner, but I don’t love the sin. I use the word evil because that’s how scripture describes sin. It seems as if you’re deliberately repeating things back and disregarded everything I’ve stated. I don’t believe you’ve even read the Bible. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Judging your vocabulary, this has turned into a insult fest rather than a logical conversation. This has become more emotional for you rather than insightful. It’s a strange phenomenon to me that you’re so angry.
I’ve given you some topics to probe at, and you’re not taking the offering or invite. You’re repeating back the same things such as vague claims on science, and disregarding my attempts to respond. You say my book is nonsense, and I elaborate giving you an entry to probe, and you say my book is nonsense. I’m still getting a whole lot of nothing burgers.
We don’t choose our sexual identity. Gender and sex is a biological fact. Men on average produce 7x more testosterone than women. Our endocrine system is directly related to our social behavior. Men have differences in their neurological makeup, and bone structure. There are many differences to men and women. While there are more effeminate men by nature and more masculine women by nature, that doesn’t conclude that sex or gender is a spectrum. That’s like saying that amount of toes we have is a spectrum between 1-10.
@youngmix once you realize that there are finite resources in the world and that the more people that are accepted into mainstream who are different the more conflict you will have... you realize equality and hatred are the same thing
no civilization has ever been built on equality as humans are naturally unequal
@Zenit93
I never argued the definition of sex or various definitions' accuracy, including that sex is a non-discrete variable, but an infinite point limited scope spectrum variable. This is something that you have given my argument, but I never claimed.
I would argue that you are wrong about biology and sex, I believe that the research and evidence concerning sex is very straight forward, there are three expressions of sex for mammals, and the majority of cases fall into either male or female, with rare hermaphrodite cases. The sex is usually created by the chromosome combination, XX or XY, and a strong way to find evidence of a mammal's sex is whether or not their sexual organs can produce sperm or eggs.
An individual not identifying with how their sex is represented in their society, AKA gender dysphoria, seems to arrive from several factors, and it manifests itself when an individual does not feel associated with tokens that their sex wears, ways of viewing their sexes' role, being addressed with words that are associated with their sex, etc.
I do not believe that their feelings of dysphoria automatically changes their sex, because even surgery will not change your chromosomes/DNA.
A very small portion of the population experiences this, and I believe that they require study, sensitivity, and support, rather than argument over their struggles.
@Zenit93
Concerning what I hypothesized, I am not saying that anyone has changed sexes, I am saying that people identify with various sexual identities and orientations, and they could not do so in the past, as these modes of expression simply were not presented as possible ways to view oneself. I also said that scientists uncovered these modes of expression after years of research. I also said that various religions suppressed/suppress such behavior in individuals, and that can have an effect on a person's ability to express their sexuality. At times, a religious community's reaction to certain sexual identities has been violent. I am saying that when people do not associate themselves with a religion, they do not have the identity struggle that the religion creates.
The majority of the LGBTQI+ community is groups concerned with sexual orientation, which is who a person is attracted to romantically. Newer ways of reporting sexual orientation now exist in our measurements, like bisexual and pansexual. I believe that awareness of these possible expressions of romance, and a lack of religious resistance, has allowed people to report their identity in larger numbers than previous generations.
Other than that, I addressed my issues with the various unrelated arguments concerning my hypothesis, namely that homosexuals are treated as evil doers by certain Christian communities.
@007kingifrit
I'm sure that the United States constitution literally says the opposite of what you have stated, but I agree that most of the authors of that document held very strong prejudices that have been debunked.
The issue is not equality in all ways, I do not believe in communism, only equal rights. The only resource required for that is kindness, without any other accompanying resource. You do not need to spend money, or spend extra time to treat a homosexual couple like you would a heterosexual couple, you only need to treat them with kindness. Period. Their existence removes resources from no one else's mouths.
So I am not really sure why you are bringing up finite resource allocation without societies. There is no cost to treating people as you would like to be treated, there is only effort put into treating people well, or effort into treating people poorly.
That would prove to be true if your gender wasn't a direct response of your sex. Suggesting that they are two separate entities is simply untrue. Men tend to be more aggressive because of their high count of the primary male sex hormone testosterone. The man didn't pick this trait out. It was biologically assigned to him.
@youngmix there is a pattern in what you say. you constantly seek authoritiess for what you believe
there is no such thing as "professional philosophy" that's a hilarious statement, anyone can come up with a philosophy... which is why that major has the lowest pay of all majors and highest unemployment
dictionaries are not for adult conversation, they lack completeness, complexity and nuance. they are a starting point for children to learn new words... that's it
same with textbooks. they are inherently for the beginner. that's why "textbook definition" is a term used to insult a definition and imply it is too simple for the real world
and the prejudices of the founding fathers cannot be "debunked" you just take modern sensibilities and pass them off as fact.
kindness is not a worldview, eventually you will find a situation where kindness to one person requires harming another. this is inevitable. rights require resources, therefore equality of any kind including rights is just not possible.
@Zenit93 Can you quote the lines that you are responding to? The thread has gotten a little long, and I am trying to match your response to mine, and I think I know what you are referring to, but I am not sure.
I will respond as if you are referring to "... I am not saying that anyone has changed sexes, I am saying that people identify with various sexual identities and orientations, and they could not do so in the past..."
If I am understanding you correctly, when you write --"That would prove to be true if your gender wasn't a direct response of your sex." and "Suggesting that they are two separate entities is simply untrue."-- you mean that it is impossible for someone born with an XY chromosome to feel more comfortable expressing themself as the opposite sex? For example, it is impossible for a man to enjoy wearing dresses?
@007kingifrit
As I was writing my response, I realized that this has strayed considerably from the main point..
Please tell me how my posted hypothesis is wrong. Here is a succinct restating:
I am saying that people identify with various sexual identities and orientations, and they could not do so in the past, as these modes of expression simply were not presented as possible ways to view oneself. I also said that scientists uncovered these modes of expression after years of research. I also said that various religions suppressed/suppress such behavior in individuals, and that can have an effect on a person's ability to express their sexuality. At times, a religious community's reaction to certain sexual identities has been violent. I am saying that when people do not associate themselves with a religion, they do not have the identity struggle that the religion creates.
@007kingifrit
As for the points that you brought up, I have arguments for them, but I believe that most of those topics are unimportant concerning us understanding each other. For some of the topics, I did not mean to direct those words at you, and I am sorry for that. If you would like to continue with those points, then I am open to continuing those topics, but I am not sure if they are what we care to explore.
Now your last points, "... eventually you will find a situation where kindness to one person requires harming another.", and "... rights require resources, therefore equality of any kind including rights is just not possible." are very intriguing.
I believe that there are constant conflicts of desire, but there are ways to identify when someone is in the wrong, when they have acted against the legal system that also establishes their rights. In essence, a criminal does just this, exercises their right to happiness by infringing upon another person's right to the same. They take from their victim, sometimes from their body or more, and if they are caught, then our legal system protects all of our collective rights to happiness by punishing that criminal.
In our current case, the legal conflict that I see is between the freedom of religion, and the rights to life, liberty, and happiness. (Perhaps the resource you were speaking of.) This leads to a conflict between religion, and the right to be treated without discrimination. In this case, it is some Christians discriminating against non-heterosexuals and those who do not identify with their sex or gender.
@007kingifrit
Freedom of religion is the freedom to worship without discrimination, but it is not the right to force your religious views, which are your various dogmatic beliefs, upon your countrymen. If this were the case, then religion could be used as an excuse to do horrible things. If a religion had a law that forced it to discriminate against Christians, to not serve them, or to treat them with repute, then I would defend Christians as well. This is part of the separation of church and state, that your church's rules do not apply to people outside of your congregation, and even then there are limits. But, I still support your wish to follow your faith, but I believe that you should be prepared to be punished by the legal system for you crimes. We do not live in a country governed by, and consisting solely of your congregation.
But I would like to posit another idea: that your very life is enriched and sustained by a terrifying network of sins. From child slavery in chocolate, clothing, cell phones, some foods, and some metals; to violent governments and groups who supply some of our agriculture and technology; to evil individuals who lobby and purchase our government officials, so that our laws can be swayed to serve their own agendas.
Why have the anti-homosexual Christian communities not reacted with as much intensity to these individuals?
1. you used satisficion to make your hypothesis. that is you came up with a plausible explanation and instantly assumed it is true. satificion is always wrong.
2. we further know that genderism is being pushed on kids in schools and 95% of kids grow out of it after a certain age so it is clear that the data proves your hypothesis wrong
3. it's unscientific, i can't observe someone's gender, and i can't test someone on their gender. thus it is a religion not a science. all science must be observed and tested
also, you need to control yourself and write in proper succinct responses, not multiple 5 paragraph responses. hard writing makes for short reading.
@007kingifrit
I'm not sure when I utilized or felt satisficion, I do not want organized religions to be abusive towards any community, and I wish that abuse did not effect people.
"...95% of kids grow out of it...", that very specific percentage of children grow out of what exactly?
"it's unscientific, i can't observe someone's gender, and i can't test someone on their gender. thus it is a religion not a science. all science must be observed and tested"
Gender is easily observed, like many social phenomena, it is as simple as asking. If gender identities change within an individual, then you treat it like any variable that can change within an object, and you also measure the fact that it changes. This gives the variable the possibility of being mutable within certain members of a population.
100 years of research consistently shows that 95% of people grow out of thinking they are the wrong sex (gender doesn't exist) so we can safely ignore the claims of people about their gender.
asking someone their gender is not observing gender. just like asking someone if they see a ghost is not observing a ghost
a scientist must DIRECTLY OBSERVE A THING WITH NO MEDIUM for it to be science. i cannot see your gender. it is not a science. if i ask a person i have no way of telling if they are telling the truth or not
@youngmix new research out today disproves your thesis. more and more women are claiming to be gay but the % who self report sexual encounters with women has not gone up or down in decades
furthermore of the new people claiming to not be straight most report only having sex with the opposite sex quillette.com/.../
so that's it then, it's settled. it's all a fad
Unfortunately, liberals have done much in recent years to normalize the phenomenon of "homosexuality." The fact is that even a large number of people with conservative views now believe that gay marriage is a good thing, or that being gay is normal. However, this is not a sign of any "progress" in society, as liberals say, but rather a sign of total moral bankruptcy of the American nation, which is deliberately encouraged "from above", and which undoubtedly leads to any other decline - economic , cultural, social.
And the fact that a record high number of Americans identify as LGBT is another proof that this is not something you are born with in most cases. This is something that increases when it is encouraged and tolerated. Of course, many young people now identify as LGBT, probably simply because that's the fashion. Just because they think it's "cool", they think it will draw attention to themselves and be "praised" by the liberal environment around them. As long as progressive liberals are allowed to dominate America's public environment, education, and media, so be it.
That is because none of them ever had a real relationship with the opposite sex so they decided to go gay figuring they would never get sex, so any port in a storm.
trendy so everyone wanna just say they are gay
You can "identify" as anything you please, but that doesn't alter in any way reality as it actually is. Self-delusion seems to be rampant among those who "identify" as belonging to 'Generation Zed' (a faux label, like 'Generation X' and 'Millennial', that has its origins in marketing).
Anyway, I think I'll identify as a billionaire. Now give me all your money, because I'm also entitled and deserve it! :P
Get in line sister!
Fantastic. It's great to see people more free to be who they are and love who they love.
I think the thing a lot of straight people forget is that it isn't that being LGBTQ is "new". Gay, lesbian, bisexual, trans, non-binary, etc - people like this have existed since ancient times.
It's growing seemingly exponentially now because people are no longer needing to hide it to be safe nearly as much (it is still a crime in places and people are still killed daily for their sexuality - Pride is a protest as much as a celebration).
This means younger people are able to safely identify as LGBTQ earlier in life, and those of us who grew up needing to hide it can be open more safely, now.
Yeah, having drag queen story hour and providing books for five year olds on anal sex or how being nonbinary is the greatest thing in the world totally isn’t influencing people though. There have always been this many people who are LGBTQ+ blah blah blah.
“ Pride is a protest as much as a celebration)”
Yes. Let’s all get together and celebrate sodomy. Why it’s a form of protest. And don’t forget to bring the kids, they need to see what PRIDE is all about.
Please. Cut the bullshit with your celebration crap.
@Cubus dude. No, have you not heard of the Sacred Band of Thebes.
Ancient Romans were hardcore gay. It's just that historians of the past - like many people - were forced into spouting cishet narratives.
All these straights today still obsessed with two guys sitting five feet apart, cause they're not gay.
Lmao. Happy Pride! 🏳️🌈♥️💜💙🌈
As always with results (though i think these results are fake but let's assume it is real), there will always be misplaced people...1) It can be a tactic used to support one's friends. Essentially a lie. Or 2) it can be them, while not feeling attraction to more than one gender or even to the opposite, still being open to orgies and such... like people have sex with those they find UNattractive all the time... so... open to experience. Although Gen Z has absolutely no problem lying... it may not necessarily be a lie, just it may be they fail to distinguish between... Identifying as one... and... Being open to the experience... So back to what I say in the beginning... I know a guy who ""reverted"" after he was treated for schizophrenia... now this is something I don't understand... so just saying.. life is strange, there are always exceptions and things we will not understand.
Technically a small subset of the population has always been gay. The fact that it is exploding in size should be raising some alarm bells. Either it’s a trend that people are following, which destroys the argument of “born this way”, or there is something that is actually causing record number of people to be born gay. Regardless, since even heterosexuals aren’t reproducing at sustainable rates , we are headed for a population collapse in the Western world, Russia and China by 2050 anyway. So things aren’t going to really work out for anyone in the long run.
what u ean russia and china by 2050?
mean by*
Unsustainable birth rates. After the boomers age out and pass on, Millennials and Zoomers aren’t having children so wealth isn’t being passed on. China is going to be the hardest hit due to their old one child policy resulting in far more men than women.
We’re quickly approaching a point where there are going to be more people dying than being born.
I actually like the idea of more people dying than being born , we dont need more insane people
I support it. Even if we don’t mention our rights to be happy and choose whoever we want to be with, let’s just look at it from the loops of evolution, nature has its way to balance everything.
With the rate we reproduce we’ll be too much too handle for the Earth.
Many LGBTQ + people don’t want children, many just adopt. In a way, you can say they’re doing you a favour, they’ll raise the kids of hetero couples.
P. S. I support LGBTQ + people having their own children, I am just talking according to statistics that shows many of them don’t have their own children and instead choose to adopt or foster other’s children.
What in the what?
I do not get why most people in this comment are trying to shame people for coming out and saying it's a trend. The thing is the world right now is more accepting than it used to be that's why more people are able to come out of the closet. SEXUALITY IS NOT A TREND! 21% is not even that much so why are you all mad?
Sexuality is definitely a trend 😂. There is always a new trending porn star, hentai, face, etc. A prime example is Mia Khalifa, Belle Dalphine, bowsette, furries, ahegao, etc. Being Bi/gay is no different from wearing the latest fashion or identifying as another gender, changing pronouns, etc. Gen Z was influenced by social media, millennials, celebrities, music, entertainment…It was super trendy to come out. The old school gays and trans despise the new generation. It’s not people just “coming out”. If 21% of people were literally gay, it would decrease the population by a massive amount. Notice how majority of women are bi instead of actually lesbian? That’s because a majority of women aren’t actually gay. They just like to be unique, attention, etc. Almost all the girls i’ve met that claim bisexuality haven’t even had sex with a woman. At best they kissed the same sex as an experiment.
Acceptance has nothing to do with it. It's a form of degeneracy being pushed on the west by China with full steam ahead aggression, in the hopes of weakening America into slavery. And sexual profligate criminals want to ram it down as many throats as possible, in order to make it easier for them to traffic children and get away with it.
If it were about acceptance, then it wouldn't need to trample acceptance of groups that don't want to celebrate it. That don't want to endorse its political causes. Yet, trample mercilessly is all the demonic rainbow ever does.
Tbh I feel like a lot of people are just jumping on a band wagon bc they think it’s cool to be something other than straight. I have a lot of respect for lgbtq but I feel like a lot of the people “transitioning” or “coming out” probably are copy cats (no offense intended)
You’re not wrong in saying that. By respect I meant I’m not going to stop them from doing so if that’s what they want to do, they’re welcome to. Personally if I was lesbian I wouldn’t wear pride clothes or loudly announce that I’m lesbian.. but that’s also my shy personality.
Someone who forces others to call them happy has a mental illness. That's how the movement started, with people demanding others call them gay which at the time meant happy. Anyhow lots of people are confused these days. I've seen first hand when hardcore 'gay' dudes claim they want nothing to do with women but when they had the opportunity to bed a woman they did. A man who trusts his girlfriend/wife's "gay" friend to be with her as if he's harmless is a fool in my book.
LBG is normal and I support it, is the rest of the letters that don't belong there, this gender thing is stupid and we are at the peak of it. A lot of young people transition because they're not comfortable with their bodies for different reasons (trauma, normal growing discomfort, abuse) or they just look at people saying if you're feminine/masculine/neutral you're this and that, etc, and in this days of "acceptance" a lot of therapists aren't doing their job right and instead of doing therapy and make the person think deeply about their feelings they just assert whatever the person says and so we see teenagers using hormones, blockers, having surgeries when their brains haven't even finished developing. The results of this medical malpractice are showing rn, the amount of detransitioners is growing as fast as the amount of transitioners. Wait for it to explode.
I don’t believe the numbers this just some propaganda tool. If a gay couple has kids, that only got that child by a heterosexual, straight couple who decided to take an adopted child. I’ve noticed LGBTQ supporters get super triggered by religion. So why is it okay to accept all these ideologies? Quite frankly I don’t care if someone is straight or gay. But when gay people try to reason with the natural selection of life, the power of God and use false stats and “science” that’s where I cringe. That’s why we have a reproductive system. Men can’t have babies naturally. Women can’t either unless a man is involved, the biology of life. It even traces to animals, mammals and insects of reproduction. If 100% of the world went gay, there would be no more life on earth, eventually everyone would die because everyone would not classify themselves as a gender or have kids. People can dislike this but I’m spitting facts.
I keep fucking telling people that if you make this shit look trendy to kids they're going to pick up on that and intentionally go towards that direction.
But nnnooooo, TikTok doesn't brainwash kids guys, it's not ruining Gen Z and giving them a thousand different mental illnesses.. suuuure.
Groomers must die. The number should be zero percent. Realistically, closer to 0.0025%. To be this high, suggests decades of merciless indoctrination by communists who know degeneracy promotion is a powerful way to destroy society. These kids' have everything so backwards and upside down, it's hard to imagine there's any hope for them.
A large number of people will identify as whatever is necessary to gain some sort of advantage. The question is not why 21% claim such but why only 21% claim such.
We came off a decade where this stuff is being pushed obsessively by the people who dominate our cultural institutions so pretty much everyone sees the advantage in claiming such.
Unfortunately a lot of emotionally and mentally vulnerable people (who tend to be young) have been swayed into doing very self-destructive things to themselfs to gain a piece of that power.
"We came off a decade where this stuff is being pushed obsessively by the people who dominate our cultural institutions so pretty much everyone sees the advantage in claiming such."
Please, tell me what cultural institutions you're referring to. Academia? I don't see an advantage to calling myself something I'm not. What power do I gain? Unless you mean the power of sympathy from being downtrodden and victimized? And yet, the "poor you" position only seems to be a spotlight. Do you think I could get a professorship or raise from championing such positions. Truthfully. I want to hear what you have tos say on this...
@Screenwriter There are a great many benefits to claiming victimhood status in general and benefits to claiming LBGQ whatever status specifically.
Generally it gives support and a questioning eye to any denied perk making people less likely to choose others over you. Indeed there are entire illicit professions built around the exploration of such conning of people. The best thing about this claim is it is difficult to impossible to ever prove your lying. This particular claim has other unique perks such as even opening the doors for horny or less competitive boys to women's locker rooms and sports, which is of enormous value.
As a matter of fact a great many people do get Jobs and positions via the competitive advantage of said claims give in an affirmative action minded world as well. Including currently serving U. S. Senators.
Sorry i don't buy the idea that people are not abusing it, we have seen quite a few people doing a bad job abusing it regularly. Who knows how many more competent people never get caught or reported on.
If this really is true then wow
Why and how did this fad ever get so big?
It is incredibly unrealistic to me just how many say they are not what they are. And I mean compare it to this: like said below, 10/19 students in a class are gay or transgender. And at my school there are 5 students that take prescriptions such as adderall out of my one class of 10.
They will sometimes all form a group and start talking about their medications and changes to it and stuff. Or one of them whines “I forgot to take my medicationnnn” and they all go aww and start trying to give them support.
Years ago I thought this sexual behavior was a decision. Then an ex girlfriend once gave me a convincing argument that “homosexuality is mother natures way to prevent overpopulation”.
That was the first time I heard a logical argument for homosexuality being genetic behavior vs. a choice.
However I find myself questioning this again given the exponential percentages of gen Z identifying with alternative sexual identities. I am starting to believe this IS more of a choice for most people vs an innate decision. This is social contagion.
As always with results (though i think these results are fake but let's assume it is real), there will always be misplaced people...
...
1) It can be a tactic used to support one's friends. Essentially a lie.
Or 2) it can be them, while not feeling attraction to more than one gender or even to the opposite, still being open to orgies and such... like people have sex with those they find UNattractive all the time... so... open to experience.
Although Gen Z has absolutely no problem lying... it may not necessarily be a lie, just it may be they fail to distinguish between
... Identifying as one... and
... Being open to the experience
...
So back to what I say in the beginning... I know a guy who ""reverted"" after he was treated for schizophrenia... now this is something I don't understand... so just saying.. life is strange, there are always exceptions and things we will not understand
@LovingLoverReturned society has incentivized people to “identify” as an intersectional. Anything is better than being a cis gendered straight white male.
But when you add up the alphabet people, minorities and women then straight white males are actually a small minority in comparison to the “intersectional” coalition.
Hmmmmm
There may be truth to that specifically in America or the West.
@LovingLoverReturned again it has to do with incentives. Just ask Rachel Dolezal.
The women are mostly turning bi and the men are turning gay and tranny. At the end of the day this means more sex and hot threesomes for me. Heyyyyyyy partayyyyyy.
But basically they are all evil people. Id like to see more countries criminalize public gay behavior and promotion of gay behavior.
I think polls only reflect what Democrat think. Everyone else ignores the propaganda channels/polling companies. If you are polling less than a third of the population, you're blind as a bat. All your numbers will be wrong. They lost the trust of the majority of the country, so they are unable to do their job and thus are worthless.
Before the election in 2020 only 10% of republicans and 30% of independents supposedly trusted the media. Today, those percents have likely declined to something 2 or 3%. Shit even large swaths of Democrats have stopped trusting the media and are abandoning the party in mass. I have democrats coming up to me like holly shit, can you believe that these trannies are trying to groom little kids. If my kids were still in school I'd home school them today. I'm like, wow you just found that out huh... So in reality they may not even be polling 30% of the population, they might be be polling fringe extremist communists.
sadly we are heading to a very weird era
Nope. The media just sold out to evil people and are attempting to utilize propaganda to demoralize a population. We're in an international information war. A lot of people see through the bullshit. The same thing happened in the USSR. They knew state run media was full of shit and they trusted nothing they said. Western nations are in the same sort of situation where the media has been weaponized against them, and a lot of people are aware of it.
will things ever get better?
Historically there have always been gay people and there always will be. I mean animals in nature even display homosexual behavior.
What I'm more concerned about is lack of social intelligence and communication skills. People are losing their social lives because of virtual replacements and with inflation many young people have a tough time going out and meeting new people in an organic way.
People are all coming out with their 'new' sexuality. Realistically tho people are having much less sex than in previous generations. Blame the internet, blame online dating, blame social media. The truth is family values are falling apart in America. Few people want a family and kids. I'm one of them. I don't believe in a partner for life, I don't want kids. I still need love, affection, and sex in my life tho.
I Googles and most estimates are less than 5% but they also said, "Nobody knows." In any event, I doubt there is significant percentage difference between generations. Therefore, most likely, it is much less than 21%.
Mental illness along with the monkey see monkey do mentality
🤣🤣🤣 I know they were so stupid 🤣
It's fashionable so young people identify with it... in a few years they will be as embarrassed as the emo kids.
Wow! I think the majority of them are in the B category.
hopefully you are not with them
Good to hear
I think it's a "label" that's being around way too quickly because there are people that really struggle with their identity and there are people being sexually adventurous try something solely sexual and are therefore considered as part of that spectrum.
I have mixed feelings towards that group because I feel like it's actually a minority but it has become a trend of anything goes that brings pleasure.
It has always been easy for a bisexual person to suppress their feelings and date straight If you were bi, you could find a person of the opposite gender to settle for, even if it wasn't your best match. It just wasn't worth the risk. With homophobia almost non existent in gen -x they are free to be true to themselves. They may still alternately settle down with a person of the opposite gender, but they can be honest about their feelings.
I think people just joke around with it I have to admit I say im gay sometimes to my friends to see what they say but im actully not my brothers and a lot of other boys also act gay when they have crushes on girls so some of gen z fakes it
Wait can we call that 15% women? What is a woman? u o now you done it.
There is a medical reason for this by the way. Might look up Phthalates. Be an interesting read. Form your own opinion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-oNZKNv0UY
very very very interesting, first time hearing about this
Look up Dr Shanna Swan and Joe Rogan. That too is an eye opener.
I also want to add - whether or not I agree with any choice someone makes in this spectrum or they disagree with mine or my stance, everyone agrees that hatred, meanness, cruelty is not acceptable.
You are allowed to disagree but you are not allow to be mean about it or force your views on others.
Here is the video interview Joe Rogan did with Dr Swan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1B44VmZFiI
I think it’s beautiful that people can be free to be themselves and have their sexuality validated. Gay, bisexual, pansexual and queer folks have ALWAYS existed, whether small minded people are willing to accept that or not. The only reason why there’s so many openly queer people in the world now is because in the past they have been shunned and forced back into a closet, or forced into conversion therapy (which doesn’t actually work), or they’ve been killed.
To my fellow queers, keep on being you, and don’t let these pathetic homophobic low-lifes on gag bring you down.
❤️🧡💛💚💙💜
you the reason why this world is a messed up
🫠 do us all a favour and stay hidden under your bridge, troll.
do us all favour and disappear from this world, queer.
Awww does my sexuality threaten you? I feel sorry for you. Must be a sad state of reality you live in.
your sexuality is disgusting and you have mental illness so does lgbtq+ community
I’m happily queer since it means I don’t have to be involved with revolting men with views such as yourself. Ick. 🤢
you can be happy queer it still won't change the fact that you lgbtq have mental illness🤢🤢
Ask them again in 5 years. This is trendy now.
My personal opinion, whether you like it or not, it's good. We need more. The less people procreate, the more chance Earth have to recover. It's natural selection to separate the seed and the husk.
@joesheks True. But the third worlders still have a chance to develop. Americans reached their maximum, downhill from here.
It just about doubles every generation. So by 2050 we will all be gay 😌😌😌
Not to be a downer but Gay/Lesbian will be made extinct, and replaced by transmen/women. In the past when a boy acted feminine he was gay, nowadays they just convince the kid he's trans and cut off his penis and pump him full of drugs before his 10th birthday and all I can think is "did anyone ever consider that he might be gay?"
@DCPowered highly unlikely considering there are a lot of factors that go into being trans.
In what clown world circus did these results come out of
feminist world
And they're the ugly ones trying to get a cheap identity and confirmation. Ever wondered why models never colour the hair pink and get piercings? Same shit but reversed.
Real studies for decades found 10% of the population were not straight, regardless of culture, background, religion, etc.
That means (to me) if this study can be trusted, ten percent are deluded or making claims for attention or peer pressure or delusional self diagnosis. That's worrying.
No wonder their suicide rate has now climbed to over 40%.
Highly doubt those stats posted onto Instagram of all places lmao. It's increasing because people can be more open about it but it's not just gonna increase to that much within a couple years.
News flash don't get your factoids from Instagram.
only on the main feminist page
This is what Public Schools and an anti-Creator, God of man in His Image gets you. FOOLS dumbfounded stupidity…EVEN the jackass and dog/cat (children for some), without Soul and human Mind know how the body correctly is designed to Work.
its very sad :(
I am almost the most hated type of human on Earth. I'm male, white, straight and in about another 15 years I'll be old. Old, white straight male. So nobody cares about my opinion, I'm just a scrub in societies eyes. Oh yeah, even worse, I'm a "breeder." You know society is ready for collapse when society looks at "breeders" as a bad thing.
So, if you are asking me what I think? I don't give a flying f**k.
You think 60 is old? Think again. You should be hitting your stride at 60. Know and like who you are, starting a second or third career, your kids are grown and on their way. You can be their consultant in life. You're into generativity! Older people's opinions are important because they have experience and have lived a life or two during that experience.
There are gay breeders too. Most are very proud they have children and love them the same as you love yours. Parenting is parenting.
@Screenwriter Wish everyone seen it the way you do. I'm simply speaking on how society sees it, which does not reflect on how I see things. I actually have mad respect for my elders as any I have ever spoken to on a personal level has never given me bad advice. Sadly, this day and age, not everyone sees the world as I do.
The wise young ones and t he old souls do. They're everywhere, but shhhh... they're quiet. You have to look carefully.
@Screenwriter It would seem I have found at least one. ;) Thanks for the chin-up there.
It's a phase just like we wore flight pants and BK Knights and overalls in the 90's. But I can't hate on a gay man b/c I love Dior, Versace, Dolce & Gabanna, Yves Saint Laurent.. gay men are awesome makeup artists too!
They’re just boring people who make something that’s actually private their entire personality people don’t have hobbies or interest anymore there’s no individuality they say be yourself but they don’t even know themselves they adopt these personas that fit into lgbt culture they’re actually some of the most boring people in the world
Hmm. Well I don't ry have anything against it, but I don't think anyone should be labeled. Just love who you love!
I don’t really have an opinion. As long as people are being happy and respectful then I’m good with it
there is no such thing as sexual identities. they change with social pressure. they aren't scientific concepts at all. I met a lesbian in college... banged her for 2 years. she didn't want to give up the lesbian label though.
these things really are just boxes we force ourselves into and then we can't get out because we would have to admit deeply personal things to others or say we are wrong... things we don't want to do.
Didn't see this question on the census.
Guessing they aren't real fags, they are trendy fags.
It's trendy to be a faggot.
Trendy, Trendy Trendy
Gay monkeypox will separate the real Homos from the players.
The insecurity is clearly evident here. Other peoples sex lives do not effect mine.
A lot of exclusively dick sucking women saying they are lgbt.
yeah most women are bi
I'm so tired of that old saw: "ALL WOMEN ARE BI.." It's a lot of hooey. But young men seem to be convinced. I think it's because young women are hedging their bets or it's also trendy.
@Screenwriter Basically.
One of the silliest things of this all is the fact that mental illness is trendy as well, and romanticized.
And way more, by the way.
It's basically people who have no personality who suck trying to build their "character" in the way characters are built in the dumb novels they read, or shows they watch.
A lot of telling, not a drop of showing.
Worst, it actually sucks for actual gay and bi people. It sucked in my time, the sheer amount of lesbian friends who I had to constantly advise to stop chasing straight women and posers was off the charts.
Imagine nowdays?
Wait a minute. Why were these lesbians chasing straight women? Because those women said they were bi or gay? And I'm missing the issue of posers. Explain please.
@Screenwriter In some cases yes, that's the posers, what was called 'mini lesbians".
On other cases it was just sheer stupidity, to the point of sexually assaulting straight chicks in front of their boyfriends, but was a minority of course, but simping for overtly straight chicks that show no interest in any woman what so ever?
Yeah, that was actually common.
For gay dudes it was even worst, them porking married men wasn't uncommon, the simping for the closet. That's risk of death stupid, I had male friends that had to disappear because the wife found out.
Those people must be extremely nutty risk takers... I don't get that shit at all... Esp the men. And the bi women? Just a stupid position to take. But, ah youth. I've done some stupid things too that have nothing to do with sexuality that physically injured me! Lord. I was so lucky I wasn't maimed. whew...
@Screenwriter I wish I was exclusively talking about young adults, lol!
But yeah, patience is required.
This means that 79% of the population of this gen does not identify itself as such. Thoughts?
I don't care personally, I don't even care if this country ends up getting run by someone in the LGBTQ community. I actually think it'll be kinda funny seeing antigays loose their shit. Pretty soon every guy will be gay and every lady will be lesbian. Then we will all die from extinction. Anyways it's going to rise. As long as Im still breathing and living my own life, I don't care if more people become LGBTQ
1. All females are bisexual as countless studies have shown
2. I think it is absolutely disgusting and WILL weaken us and thankfully either the Allah worshippers or communists will conquer us and destroy that shit for good. And all the culture related to it. "I kissed a girl and liked it" how about you kissed a girl and ended up dead.
Correction, females are more lesbian than bisexual. At least when it comes to arousal which is what counts as "sex"uality
people have always been LGBTQ its just more socially acceptable now so more people are openly putting it out there. there's still many in the closet to this day, especially decades ago, my uncle just recently came out after being in the closet for years.
Yeah well, most of them are suicidal and can't clean up after themselves or hold up a relationship either.
So it's a stat that matters little. More organs for the rest of us, that have more meaningful and fruitful lives to live.
I thinks its great that people have the freedom be and to love who they want.
100%.
Notice how it’s only guys disliking everyone’s supportive comments… hmm…
@petitedollbabee … you can’t see you dislikes comments. So you can speculate that it’s only guys… but you can’t make a definitive statement
@Subarugirl Are you not able to see your dislikes? Your comment has 6 blue thumbs down. Blue users are men.
@petitedollbabee I see six dislikes but they aren’t colored
I’m using the app, so if you’re using the site that could be why you can’t see colours of the likes/dislikes. All of the supportive comments on this question have blue dislikes.
@petitedollbabee ahhh okay that makes a lot more sense. Thanks for telling me I had no idea... sorry for that other comment that was rude.
Oh only Gen Z. Okay, I was gonna say. I'm pretty certain it's not that high.
Good for them. They are brainwashed
Yeah, a lot of women are bi, and a lot of women love gay men
Whats my thoughts?
There needs to be a mass extinction.
That’s my thoughts.
Nuclear holocaust when?
@SlightlyEccentric
No they’re gonna terminate everyone with the NEEDLES. If you understand.
Let’s hope these sickos got the sh0ts
In nyc these homosexual men and women flood the city. Try going outside not seeing one of tem
sad to hear the beautiful nyc turned into shithole
My thoughts are that it shows people are generally becoming more accepted all over the world. There are still places where things like being LGBT is illegal, but it is generally getting better.
It's probably 21% of some couple thousand people they polled and didn't tell us just how many.
Also remember that homosexual behavior and declaration is trendier with women more than men.
You can also add your opinion below!
Most Helpful Opinions