MovieChat Forums > Kristen Stewart Discussion > She’s getting married

She’s getting married


After being 2 years with Dylan Meyer they are engaged.

https://www.eonline.com/news/1089817/kristen-stewart-is-engaged-to-dylan-meyer-after-2-years-together

reply

I had wondered if Kristen had marriage in mind anytime soon. Congrats to her and best of luck!

reply

Cute. I hope it lasts more than her previous relationships which were all rather short to say the least.

reply

disgusting and more degradation.

reply

What is disgusting about it how is it more degradation?

reply

Don't ask questions you already know the answer to. Not all of us are pretending this filth is normal.

reply

So you are a homophobe/bigot...got it.

reply

Being called that is a badge of honor in today's backward world.

reply

The only thing backward is your view, there is nothing wrong with homosexuality and people who think there is are archaic and will be left behind as society evolves towards a higher and more civilized society.

reply

The only thing we're evolving to with all this filth is a weaker degenerate society. We're on our way to being ripe for conquest by a stronger people that don't put up with this nonsense.

reply

How? The USA has the biggest/strongest military force.

reply

Not compared to China and Russia....
https://youtu.be/Kfe6d6MzeLM

Emma and her two moms will be the end of us.

reply

You people said the same about the olympics: "woke USA won't win olympics" and yet...

reply

How? The USA has the biggest/strongest military force.


Only for the moment. The left has been doing everything in it's power to change that for the last 30 years or so.

reply

BEFUS THE DUFUS.

reply

Kowalski the always shouting in all caps fool.

reply

AND THE SKY IS BLUE.

reply

Society doesn't evolve when two people of the same gender have sex, it stops right there, the evolutionary endgame.

reply

[deleted]

I don't see perversion as beautiful.

reply

There is nothing perverse about homosexuality. Two consenting adults loving each other and bonding and even deducing to adopt children to start a family.

reply

There is nothing perverse about homosexuality.


Uhh, I would call anal fissures, severe piles, and rectal infections fairly perverse:
https://www.netdoctor.co.uk/conditions/sexual-health/a2358/sexual-health-problems-affecting-gay-men/

reply

[deleted]

LMAO...AWESOME.

reply

They do not occur at the same rates moron. He has a point. Of course the article has to make a PC disclaimer like the one you quoted.

reply

[deleted]

Sorry, but you are a moron. You called me an idiot twice yet you totally avoided the point I and the other guy was making. STDS are higher among gay men than among heterosexuals, and it's not a coincidence. The point stands. Period.

reply

[deleted]

Higher rates of STDs and other problems like anal cancers among gay men are a well know fact. It's also a well know fact that many gay men have problems in having to wear diapers all their lives due to all the anal sex.

Who said I define gays only by their sex activities? I do not nor have I ever believed gays are inherently immoral because of their sexuality. Read the post I wrote earlier about Kristen Stewart's marriage replying to the OP just at the beginning of this tread.

But I do have a problem when people straw man other people's positions and points they are trying to make. You posted a reply to [–] cyguration (1942) saying that diseases occur to both heterosexuals as well as homosexuals which ignores the point he was making in that those problems are HIGHER among gays than among straight people. I simply corrected you, that's all.

And my point that the higher rates of STDs are not a coincidence is a valid one. If you use body parts for sex that are not evolutionary adapted to it, it will have negative consequences.

reply

[deleted]

There is nothing wrong with acknowledging reality about gay sex and it's natural gravitation to health problems. That doesn't mean one hates gay people. There are natural gravitations to health problems with smoking and obesity, acknowledging that does not make one hate smokers or obese people. And even if I did hate gays, that would not invalidate the point that I was making. That's called a logical fallacy.

What is your definition of perverse? What is the definition of wrong? Like I explained, nature certainly doesn't consider gay sex equivalent to heterosexual sex, otherwise it would not have these issues.

I'm not the one with prejudice, I'm simply acknowledging reality. You're the one prejudging. According to you, homosexuality has to be benign and any acknowledgement of problems associated with it is somehow heresy. But one can't even blame you, since that what the mainstream leftist culture conditions us into thinking.

Oh and there's a problem with your point about me defining gays only by their sex activities. They THEMSELVES do it. In other words, gays do not consider homosexuality to be one of their properties, but THE IDENTITY itself. Otherwise they wouldn't have been so defensive.

reply

[deleted]

Why write such a long post and absolutely no arguments. Listen, I don't give a shit about the article. STDs and other health problems are more common among gay men than among straights. That's all what I was saying.

"It was the tone and wording you used in your posts what really sets me of. Post after post all u want to talk about is STDs of gay MEN and MEN sex and you always make sure to use graphic nature of it. All i wanted was to talk about this in more general manner but you didn't want to hear it and u didn't want include Gay women and Hetero women in the the mix and talk about this problem in GENERAL."

Maybe because THAT's THE POINT INCONTENTION? Duh, what planet are you living on?

" You completely ignore the point i was trying to make."

You made NO points deputing any of my points. Ever. Why am I even wasting my time with you?

''At the end of the day it doesn't really matter to me what the rate would show. What matters to me is how ppl like you go about things like this..''

Then you don't care about the point I was making which means I automatically win. You don't even dispute my point, nor do you care about it.

"To you it was all about a contest to show the world how gay men and their sex activities are the worse and bad and used graphic details and your statements like this one;
''If you use body parts for sex that are not evolutionary adapted to it'' .
i mean wtf is wrong with you! What i was saying is, it doesn't matter who you are; men, women, gay hetero, all people could be affected by STDs which was the point of the article."

Because that's the whole point dummy. All people could be affected by traffic accidents, but people chose to speed at 100 mph drunk with no lights on are much more likely to.

And calling someone "homophobic asshole" doesn't devaluate the point he was making. Just as me debating a woman and calling her a "feminist bitch" doesn't devaluate her points.

reply

[deleted]

Oral sex has some risks when it comes to infection, but it doesn't happen any more often among heteros than homos. What matters is the overall picture, and the the latter says that gay sex is more hazardous and that is not a coincidence. It's a totally valid point and you never even attempted to make any arguments against it.

It's like anal sex. Yes, heterosexuals can have anal sex and it can cause problems, but among heterosexuals it's an exception and not the rule. Heterosexual sex doesn't naturally gravitate towards anal sex, like homosexual sex does.

Imagine if you had a group of people who naturally want to eat exclusively junk food who would strongly identify as such and be proud of it. And they get sick more often because of that lifestyle. Now when someone tells them, they reply "But other people also eat junk food". Yes they do occasionally, but not nearly as often. Your desire to eat only junk food is the problem. If you only do it occasionally it's different.

Talking about risk factors in gay lifestyle (which even you don't deny) isn't a BS agenda. Homosexuality is today not only tolerated but celebrated. Sexuality has a significant environmental component. Meaning the social attitudes towards it affect how many people engage in it's activity. If this lifestyle has risk factors then it should not be celebrated. And the risk factor in homosexuality isn't just STDs, but also paedophilia and promiscuity, drug use, depressions, etc. Warning about it's risk factors is totally logical and justified agenda. When a lifestyle is objectively bad for society, you warn about it.

Don't get me started on the phrase "homophobia". I can deconstruct and de-legitimize it from so many angles it's laughable. In short it's just a propgadanstic thought stopper. Reservations about homosexuality can be logical and rational. Just because activists have coined a biased term against doesn't prove anything. Pedo activist also have a term "ageism" to denounce critics.

reply

[deleted]

Wrong. 25% of male homosexuals admitted to a pollster they had sex with an underage boy. The true number is probably higher. I'm not saying all homosexuals are paedophiles, but the numbers don't lie. There is a natural gravitation to paedophilia in homosexuality. It's not a coincidence. Just look at ancient Greece. It was overwhelmingly adult males with small boys. There is nothing "phobic" about stating facts and making logical arguments. The only one who is prejudiced is you.

reply

[deleted]

Yet another post with nothing but insults and no argument or data. I give you data and you claim with no evidence it must be a BS poll. Never did you think it might be legit and there might actually be a significant correlation between homosexuality and paedophilia. Why is this so hard for you to believe? It seems to be you're just in denial of reality.

reply

[deleted]

Just because the narrative is offensive does not make it untrue. Get this thought your thick skull. Your entire argument is that "this is offensive". That's not an argument.

"There is no correlation between homosexuality and paedophilia."

How do you know that? The data strongly suggest there is. It seems to me you just don't want to acknowledge the truth out of political reasons.

Me and [–] cyguration (1954) have provided a lot of data and you just dismiss everything.

Tomorrow I'll post data that shows homosexuality correlates with drug use and suicides.

reply

[deleted]

Here is the proof homosexuality correlates with drug use (all drugs listed show MUCH higher use among homosexuals:
https://i.postimg.cc/MHrKBmtp/Screen-Shot-2019-04-24-at-11-55-00-PM-618x348.png

Here is the proof homosexuality correlates with sucide attempts(much higher among sexual minorities, gay men slightly higher than lesbians):
https://i.postimg.cc/6QwwyPwh/Screen-Shot-2019-04-24-at-11-56-30-PM-618x440.png

Rate of syphilis infections (much higher among gay and bisexual men):https://i.postimg.cc/q75Tjvy1/Screen-Shot-2019-04-24-at-11-57-40-PM-618x599.png

Another chart of drug use by sexuality:
https://i.postimg.cc/0QDBDkfM/drug-use-2013-data-from-crime-survey-for-england-and-wales-smoking-drinking-and-drug-use-among-young.jpg

Child abuse: https://i.postimg.cc/3xqSq4f0/homosexualchildabuse-11222014.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/Znk0scps/DCDWla-FVw-AARRBc.jpg

Number of sexual Partners:
https://i.postimg.cc/cH0QkdW8/16406561-10155013094389661-414145146229545775-n.jpg


More stats about children raised by gay parents:
https://i.postimg.cc/BvM6s3DF/DCDr9-LOV0-AAp-ROQ.jpg

More STD stats:https://i.postimg.cc/rytrGdxY/DCDWm5-DUAAAF8-E6.jpg

reply

You can keep denying facts and live in your PC fantasy land. The fact is homosexuality has been historically frowned upon for a reason. It took "only" 60 years of conditioning to society to accept it and even then it didn't entirely accept it.

Modern gay activism has nothing to do with tolerance or basic human rights. Modern gay activism is about the idea that it's somehow gay people's fundamental rights that society has to have a positive view about their lifestyle. A lifestyle which has undeniable risk factors. No other group of people demand something like this. Smokers don't demand society has to have a good opinion about smoking. Obese people don't demand society has to have a good opinion about obesity. It's a very arrogant thing to demand. You could argue society owes you tolerance, but acceptance and celebration is something entirely different.

Even you acknowledge drug use and depression are common among homosexuals. But then you accuse me of pointing out these problems are HIGHER among gay men as if somehow highlighting problems with alternative lifestyles is not a valid argument when it comes to CELEBRATING that lifestyles.

I do not have a problem with tolerating homosexuality, but I do have a problem with celebrating and promoting it. It makes no sense to promote a lifestyle which has risk factors. It's no different than promoting obesity or smoking. The argument that homosexuality has to be celebrated or else people will start persecuting it or becoming bigots does not sand. Society does not celebrate lifestyles such as obesity or smoking and most people aren't bigots towards obese people or smokers.

reply

[deleted]

You accuse me of posting nonsense, and then you post Buzzfeed as a legit source? You dismiss my sources, I dismiss yours, is this where we are at? Do you really deny homosexuality correlates with suicides and STDs after all the data I posted? Even you don't deny that it correlates with AIDS the most notorious STD in history that has killed tens of millions of people. But then you deny that it correlates with other STDS even tough my sources (which come from scientific studies clearly show otherwise). The LGBT movement is tremendously active propaganda wise. Of course, you're going to find liberal left wing sources that attempt propagate homosexuality.

SPLC are a bunch of left wing liars and bigots. They called Majid Nawaz (a former Al Qaeda member turned preacher of tolerance) an anti Muslim extremist and had to pay 3 million dollars for slander. They are as credible as Buzzfeed.

Catholic church molestation are mostly against boys...guess what, that comes from HOMOSEXUALS in the Catholic church.

reply

[deleted]

Another post with nothing but ad hominem attacks and no arguments or data.

This chart showing that homosexuality correlates with drug use DOES NOT come from a right wing propaganda source, but it legit data from a study. Do you deny this??:
https://i.postimg.cc/MHrKBmtp/Screen-Shot-2019-04-24-at-11-55-00-PM-618x348.png

This chart showing that homosexuality correlates with suicide attempts DOES NOT come from a right wing propaganda source, but is legit data from a study. Do you deny this??
https://i.postimg.cc/6QwwyPwh/Screen-Shot-2019-04-24-at-11-56-30-PM-618x440.png

This chart showing rate of syphilis infections among gay and bi men DOES NOT come from a right wing propaganda source, but is legit data from a study. Do you deny this??
https://i.postimg.cc/q75Tjvy1/Screen-Shot-2019-04-24-at-11-57-40-PM-618x599.png

This chart of drug use by sexuality DOES NOT come from a propaganda source, but is legit data from a study. Do you deny this??:
https://i.postimg.cc/0QDBDkfM/drug-use-2013-data-from-crime-survey-for-england-and-wales-smoking-drinking-and-drug-use-among-young.jpg

You haven't disputed ANY of this data. (cyguration also posted data on other STDS which you never disputed). Even you acknowledge AIDS rates (by far the worst STDS in terms of people affected, and btw AIDS didn't cease to be a problem. Drugs for it cost BILLIONS to the taxpayer) are MUCH higher among homosexuals, which means I have a point that homosexuality has risk factors. Either post proof that the charts I posted are invalid or ADMIT that homosexuality has risk factors.

Those are just risk factors of gay and bi men. Don't get me started about risk factors of transexuals.

And even those stats that may come from a political source aren't necessary incorrect. They quote data which you can look it up if it's correct. You can't just assume it's incorrect just because it comes from someone you disagree politically.

reply

[deleted]

Conspiracy theories? You don't know the definition of a conspiracy theory. Just more proof that you're an idiot.

reply

The data I posted showing risk factors of homosexuality isn't crap. You're just angry that it shows what you don't like so you attack the messenger.

reply

[deleted]

What data did you publish? Show me the data that shows STDs are not any more common among gays than straight people. Show me the data that shows drug use isn't more common among gays than among straights. Show me the data that shows suicide isn't any more common mong gays than among straights. The charts I posted aren't fake, and the fact I posted them on image sites is irrelevant. It's real data. Some of them have sources in them and for other you can use Google. Either show me that these claims I made is false, or admit homosexuality has risk factors. And why is the latter so hard for you to accept? It makes perfect sense. Even if homosexuality is natural (which itself is a disputed idea) It's not as natural as heterosexuality. And the fact it's less natural manifests itself in these risk factors. That's all I'm saying. The problem is that homosexuals associate homosexuality with their identity instead of just one of their properties. That's why they're so defensive when you simply point out the risk factors. I myself am near-sighted. I totally admit it's a result of my lifestyle like spending too much time in front of a screen. But I don't have any problem admitting that that lifestyle has a risk factor of acquiring myopia. Why? Because I don't see my myopia as my identity like homosexuals do with their sexuality.

reply

[deleted]

What is it supposed to mean that STD topic is "done and finished way back". Do you deny that STDs are more common among gay and bi men compared to straight men? Me and cyguration have shown you plenty of data.

Which specific claims has your data debunked? That homosexuals aren't any more likely to be at risk of suicide attempts? No. That homosexuals aren't any more likely to be at risk acquiring STDs?? No. That homosexuals aren't any more likely to use drugs? No. I have provide charts for all thos claims and you have done anything to debunk them.

I'm not living in fantasy land. I have provided sources for my claims. You on the other hand simply deny them and keep calling me names. It's called an ad hominem fallacy. You seem like the kind of guy who will never admit homosexuality has issues. Honest gays admit that. For example this guy on YT is gay, but acknowledges homosexuality isn't equivalent as heterosexuality and shouldn't be celebrated: https://i.postimg.cc/QtKJ0nDW/Putin-comment.png
Why can't all gays be like that?

I do not have any fear of homosexuals. When have I ever said homosexuals are bad people? When have I ever said homosexuality is a sin? I'm simply sceptical of celebration of the gay lifestyle given what risk factors it has. I have repeatedly said I don't oppose tolerance of homosexuality.

reply

[deleted]

STI) and (STD) occur in homosexual and in heterosexual people, so i don't know wtf you are trying to prove..


At a disproportionate rate. Homosexuals are 1.6% of the population but account for 67% of all STD cases in America:
https://www.reuters.com/article/health-hiv-lgbt-sex-idUSL1N13W0O720151207

That's the point.

reply

[deleted]

So, again you show your prejudice against gay ppl since you obviously think HIV/AIDS is the only STD, at least only STD you are willing to talk about since its support your narrative..


Okay, here's another link from the CDC showing that they have higher STDs all around compared to heterosexual men when it comes to Syphilis, Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C,
Chlamydia, and Gonorrhea of the penis and anus:
https://archive.md/xCNXz

AGAIN, when comes to percentage of ALL STD and STI among Homosexual vs Heterosexual the percentage is not that apart from one another.


Yes they are far apart, because homosexual men have MUCH higher rates of STDs PER CAPITA compared to heterosexual men.

reply

[deleted]

Maybe not all STDs, but most are higher among gay men. You're gaslighting.

reply

[deleted]

Calling someone names isn't an argument. Calling somebody right wing also isn't an argument. I said STDs on aggregate are higher among gay men than among straight men. Do you seriously deny this?

reply

[deleted]

The argument behind calling someone "homophobic" is "you are biased". Well, aren't YOU also biased? Why have you responded to me so many times if you don't vehemently oppose me? You are biased also. And just because someone is biased doesn't mean he automatically cannot have a point. So, no it's not an argument in this context.

reply

[deleted]

The term "homophobic" deserves as much respect as the term "heretic". It's a leftist thought stopper. The fact is there are issues with homosexuality and there is nothing wrong with pointing them out if homosexuality is CELEBRATED and not just TOLERATED as it is today. According to the new poll 39% of young people consider themselves part of the LGBT. If the numbers are right and it isn't just a result of people wanting to be "special" and "cool" then it represents a real danger to public health with all the risk factors associated with homosexuality. The data shows depressions and STDs have been on the rise lately.

What is your definition of "good faith". How would have I raised the concerns I have in good faith? Anything critical of homosexuality regardless of how supported by FACTS and DATA is "homophobic right wing bullshit" according to you. Stop pretending that you are some kind of objective tolerant fella. You're just bigoted and prejudiced as you accuse me of being.

I never said homosexuality is a social evil that must be eradicated. Stop straw manning my position. Just as I never said obesity or smoking is a social evil that must be eradicated. The difference is very few people celebrate smoking or obesity. Celebrating gay lifestyles does not make sense. I have made this point several times and you have never responded to it.

A small stigma on homosexuality is a good thing. Would you live in a world where most men cheat on their wives with other men? And have dozens of sex partners and use drugs that gays use? Would that be good for public health? What would that do to families? How many divorces, STDs, suicides...etc. There is nothing wrong with being concerned with public health and what's good for society. The idea that that entails bigotry and persecution does stand. There is small stigma on smoking and obesity and everyone but a far leftist moron agrees that this is a good thing.

I am NOT going to stop resounding until YOU do.

reply

[deleted]

You have never proven the data is made up. Just because the data comes from someone with a certain political perspective does not mean the data is false. The very graphic you posted has a SOURCE in it. D. Paul Sullins, "invisible Victims: Delayed Onset Depression among Adults with Same-Sex Parents". Depression and Research and Treatment vol. 2016m Article ID 2410392,8 pages, 2016. doi: 10.1155/2016/2410392. You are free to check, if it's really made up. Most of the other charts I posted are not from any political site, but from mainstream articles and scientific studies and you have done nothing to disprove them. You accused me of just posting jpegs. Here are the actual sources:

This chart shows homosexuality correlates with Mental Illness:
https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/NSDUH-SexualOrientation-2015/NSDUH-SexualOrientation-2015/images/nsduh-ffr6-fig14-2015.png

https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/NSDUH-SexualOrientation-2015/NSDUH-SexualOrientation-2015/NSDUH-SexualOrientation-2015.htm

This chart showing that homosexuality correlates with drug use:

https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/NSDUH-SexualOrientation-2015/NSDUH-SexualOrientation-2015/images/nsduh-ffr6-fig04-2015.png


This chart showing that homosexuality correlates with suicide attempts:

http://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/assets/4828976/lgbt_doctor_nurse_suicide.png

This chart showing rate of syphilis infections among gay and bi men:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/images/2016/STD-Trends-MSM-2015.jpg

Gay and Bi men make up 67% of HIV/AIDS infections, despite being 2% of the population:
https://www.reuters.com/article/health-hiv-lgbt-sex-idUSL1N13W0O720151207

This chart of drug use by sexuality:

https://www.slideshare.net/andrewbrown365/drug-use-2013

https://image.slidesharecdn.com/druguse2013-140729032236-phpapp02/95/drug-use-2013-data-from-crime-survey-for-england-and-wales-smoking-drinking-and-drug-use-among-young-people-in-england-10-638.jpg?cb=1406604234

You cannot deny homosexually strongly correlates with mental illness, drug use, STD infections and suicide attempts.

reply

I didn't want to restart the paedophelia debate, but you brought it up, so I have to respond.

"Gregory Herek who is one of the nation's leading researchers on prejudice against sexual minorities, "

Sorry, but a guy calls himself a researcher on prejudices against sexual minorities is not a credible source. Someone who's admitted agenda is to fight "prejudices" against gays is never going to admit something like alleged correlation between homosexuality and paedophila. We all know the gay lobby is extremely strong and influential. They know stigma of paedophilia hangs around their neck (as yourself why) and their propaganda machine will do anything they can to fight it. SPLC are far leftist and I don't trust them. (The fact they called a moderate Muslim reformist an anti Muslim extremist tells enough about their credibility, they openly LIE about people to smear them). Just like you don't trust my sources. Let me ask you something. If your admitted agenda is to fight "hate and prejudice" and the data happens to support it, what do you do? Are you honest about the data and let minorities become victims of "hate and prejudice" or do you manipulate it and skew the numbers for the greater good? These gay activists will never admit the problems with homosexuality, because it's about their freaking lives and identities.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

"The way you dismissed legit data is unbelievable


What data? You haven't put out any data. I have sourced data repeatedly and you keep ignoring it.

And your dismissive argument about nation's leading researcher on the subject i raised is just laughable.


What nation's leading researcher? Don't make me laugh. He's not a researcher on paedophilia and child abuse. He's a "researcher" on "prejudice against sexual minorities". That's an agenda driven occupation. And did he cite any DATA? Show me the data.

Btw: sucides, drug use, depression, etc.. These kind of issues affects all walks of life no matter who and what they are.


Again you keep ignoring the point that I made in the first interaction with you. Imagine you have a group of people who's lifestyle is to speed while driving drunk and they want to celebrate that lifestyle. When you confront these people about car accidents they reply "But all people have car accidents". That's how stupid your argument is.

Just look at war veterans; there suicide rate and depression because of PTSD are high.


Yes that's because of stress of war and NOBODY celebrates war.

And what a hateful thing to do, how you intentionally pushing your crap using home-made garbage and try to present them as legit data or using legit source out of context with your statements next to such source!


What home made garbage???? I've GIVEN YOU MAINSTREAM SOURCES ABOUT ALL MY CLAIMS. What planet are you living on dude?? Are you blind? I've just given you sources from mainstream articles (one is even from Vox a leftist outlet) and you continue to dismiss it without evidence.

The fact how you always portray gay men in your posts as the worse group of people in the world


WHAT? What posts? When have I ever said gay men are the worst people in the world? All I'm arguing is that the gay lifestyle has risk factors and that we should be careful when celebrating it. You're unbelievable.

reply

[deleted]

Are you really asking me that!?
All your posts, URLs you provided, your statements all leads to this logical and rational conclusion!!


Show me where I have said gay men are the worst thing in the world. Shoe me where I have said it's sinful or immoral to be gay.

Your BS about pedophilia in homosexuality and how you always isolate gay men and portrayed them as the worse when comes to whatever rate you think its bad to have in society in your view! I can go on and on.


You've never proven it's BS. It's not just my view. I have provided mainstream undisputed data on how homosexuality correlates with drug use, mental illness, suicide risks and STDs.

Here is also data on how homosexuality correlates with promiscuity: https://i.postimg.cc/1RW6XcSL/Gay-promiscuity.png.

We know promiscuity is bad as people with more sexual partners are less happy than people with less.

reply

Being gay is not something you chose to be in the first place..


There is very strong environmental component to it. I'm not saying is all environment, but EVERYTHING has an environmental and genetic component. Even such things as your hair and eye colour which people think are only genetic are partially environmental. Just look how the LGBT community has grown over the years. If that's not proof of an environmental component I don't know what is. If you seriously think weather or not society celebrates homosexuality or not has ZERO affect on how many people will be gay and most importantly BISEXUAL, you are seriously deluded. People are curious beings and experiment with their sexuality. And bisexuality is even more hazardous when it comes to STDs because they spread them from gays to the general population.

and what are you talking about ''celebrating gay lifestyle'', i mean, wtf?! You must be on some heavy shit to have your mind so fucked up.
This way of thinking is old and stupid.
I mean, one could also argue;


What planet are you living on? EVERYONE celebrates homosexuality these days. It used to be only gay activist, but not it's EVERYWHERE. All corporations, government institutions, media, the military even (just look at the latest US army ad).

The term "tolerance" which used to be a staple of leftist pro gay talking points something like 15 years ago has completely disappeared. Now it's not about tolerance anymore. It's about promotion and celebration.



I mean, one could also argue;
''being a soldier has a lot of risk factors (PTSD, suicides,etc.). We should be careful when celebrating it.''.


Soldiers have problems because they have experienced WAR. NOT because they are soldiers. Soldiers who are stationed in Germany and South Korea where there is peace do not have these problems. War is necessary evil. Nobody celebrates it.

reply

[deleted]

To even hear someone saying crap like that is cringy..
It's utter nonsense to think this way!


It's not nonsense even the slightest. If something correlates with risk factors, it makes no sense CELEBRATING IT. Smoking or obesity has risk factors and few people celebrate it. Remember, we are talking about CELEBRATION, not TOLERANCE. The threshold of problems when it comes to celebration is lower than when it comes to tolerance.

Your statements made your views on this matter more then clear.


Nothing I've said should be seen as controversial. I've never called homosexuals any slur words, never said they are inherently bad people, never said they are sinners or never said ALL of them have these risk factors. My only point has always been that there are risk factors with homosexuality and that we probably shouldn't celebrate it.

reply

[deleted]

I thought you weren't going to reply anymore.

Activism is not celebration of homosexuality, its about
awareness.


Please cut the BS. It's the same shit. You want homosexuality to bend totally de-stigmatized and even seen "cool" because that's the only way you can totally eradicate people being "homophobic" and perhaps offending you with a gay joke or by someone turning their head away when seeing two guys kissing. Today's attitudes towards homosexuality CAUSE people to become gay or bisexual (39% of young people today identify as LGBT) and therefor cause the risk factors of homosexuality I've listed.


That was my point! It's about how you always point out ''risk factors'' for being gay!


It's interesting you still put risk factors in quotes even though I'VE PROEVEN THEM with mainstream data. Forget about graphics I posted the first time. Look at the legit sources I posted later.

I just gave you an example how one can find risk factors
in everything and everyone, no matter from where risk factors came or why and can be pined on everyone, every group. But somehow you always find gay men as main target


I "target" gays because that's the only thing that has risk factors that is CELEBRATED. Find me other properties that have many risk factors which are celebrated and I will oppose them too. You've made no points with this reply.

reply


Fuck you! Hope you choke on c_m!

You HomoPhobic Bitch!

reply

And you done this with home-made data, fictional polls, etc. only to steer the narrative.


I's not home made data, I've given you mainstream sources. How many times do I have to repeat myself? Do you want me to post them again??

- Phobia: is an irrational fear of something that's unlikely to cause harm.

- HomoPhobia: irrational fear of Homosexual people.


Yes phobia is irrational fear. And there is probably phobia of homosexuals just like there is phobia of cats. But the real homophobia is very rare just like fear of cats. The problem is the term has been hijacked by activists who broadened the term's definition to include anyone who doesn't agree with them. Take the term "arachnophobia" for example. Is the average person arachnophobic? No. Now imagine if there was a group of spider activists who look at everything from the spider's perspective. According to them EVERYTHING would be arachnophobia. If you don't like having spiders in your house, you're arachnophobic. If you don't find spiders cute as kittens, you're arachnophobic. Phobia is a clinical terms that means the person in question has a condition. A condition which causes problems FOR HIM. Not problems for the subject he has a phobia of. If my attitude for homosexuality isn't causing problems FOR ME, I don't have a phobia. Just like a person who's attitudes towards spiders isn't causing distress FOR HIM is not arachnophobic. The fact SPIDERS have a problem with his attitudes towards spiders DOESN'T MAKE HIM ARACHNOPHOBIC! I'm not comparing homosexuals to spiders, I'm just making a point. People who disagree with the gay agenda and propaganda and warn about risk factors with homosexuality aren't necessarily phobic. But activists do use it as a smear term and deflection of criticism.

reply

It shouldn't matter to anyone my sexual orientation or yours for that matter! But here we are.
When we stop label people then we won't have to talk about homosexuality anymore! Only then we will start see each other as human being first!


You have a point there. I would much rather look at you as a human being than a homosexual. But the problem is YOU YOURSELF identify as a homosexual. In other words, you don't look at your homosexuality as your PROPERTY, you look at it as your IDENTITY. And that's the source of the problem. Imagine if smokers looked at smoking as their identity just as gay people. Imagine if smokers were as defensive and denialist towards risks of smoking as homosexuals are with risks of gay lifestyle. Stop looking at your sexuality as your identity and you will stop being so offended when someone like me points to proven undeniable risk factors.

reply

HomoPhobic Bitch!

You're the one to tell me how i view my self?!. Go F__k your self!

I don't play identity politics!! I always hated labels!! Fucking moron!

Don't you tell me how i identified my self! Choke on c_m! Bitch!

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Let's do this ... for example:


No.

These are just few example when comes to STDs of Men vs Women ..


Pushing the goalpost fallacy with a non-sequitur.

All i'm saying is that women have higher rate when comes to certain STDs then men


Who cares?

In your post you completely excluded women from a survey no matter which ''group'' they belong to..


This is only about homosexual men versus heterosexual men, to wit homosexuals have higher STDs per capita, full stop.

reply

[deleted]

I feel sorry for that kid being raised by Mayor Pete and her husband.

reply

Is what happened between you and your dad the reason you think this way?

reply

Because of this....

https://archive.md/m4GVM

reply

A fringe case that has nothing to do with people in general. You can find heterosexual people engaging in destructive sexual behavior as well.

reply

A fringe case that has nothing to do with people in general. You can find heterosexual people engaging in destructive sexual behavior as well.


Not fringe. That's the norm for them, the majority of them engage in that behaviour:

https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/article_files/4315111.pdf

That's why despite making up 1.6% of the population, they account for 67% of all STD cases in America:
https://www.reuters.com/article/health-hiv-lgbt-sex-idUSL1N13W0O720151207

That's a HUGE number. But it's easy to see why given what was explained in the story I linked in the above post.

Mixing aberrant and promiscuous sex with drug abuse makes up for the common lifestyle trends among homosexuals:
https://archive.md/rXYPi




reply

My God . . . I wouldn't want to see your search history.

reply

If the mainstream media and Big Tech were honest about the facts and made this data easily available for the general public this wouldn't even be a discussion.

reply

You seriously searched this gross shit out . . .you are the pervert.

reply

Didn't have to, just had to look up the stats related to their lifestyle.

reply

Bullshit. There is NO way you got to that obscure Russian propaganda ttps://archive.md/m4GVM by looking up 'stats'. It's embarrassing to see you try to play it off as though you searched for something factual and oops! stumbled onto that. Gross.

reply

I didn't stumble onto it.

Did you actually READ the articles on that site? They're filled with honest truths, studies, statistics, and research Left-wing MSM sites and outlets will NEVER report on.

reply

I say divorce within 2 years.

reply

2 months maybe, she craves attention.

reply

Who would want to marry her

reply

5 years

reply

congrats

reply

Dylan is a bit of a step down from Stella Maxwell though isn't she? I'm a bit disappointed in Kristen. Thought she could have done a bit better for herself. But hey looks aren't everything. Maybe in these kind of relationships one partner is typically androgynous and the other can be the girly glamorous one.

reply

A massive step down. Why did she break up with Stella?

reply

I believe Stella may have been eating crackers in bed.

reply