I'm sorry But watching this made me want to go straight. As a gay, I felt so disgraced with the way some of these people acted. And by people I mean the homosexuals. That one woman who left her husband and family just to get with some girl ? How selfish and detestable. And the bishop who left the family ? What kind of *beep* is this ? It is no wonder people are bashing against us ! Just look at the way some famous gays act.....
shareI'm sorry But watching this made me want to go straight. As a gay, I felt so disgraced with the way some of these people acted.
That one woman who left her husband and family just to get with some girl ? How selfish and detestable.
It is no wonder people are bashing against us ! Just look at the way some famous gays act.....
"So you would prefer that she continue to lie to her family and herself. How very progressive of you.
Maybe she didn't handle it the best possible way. Maybe you would have done it better. You know, "as a gay" maybe you would have. And maybe "as a gay" you might realize that a closeted lesbian might not be leaving her husband "just to get with some girl", but rather to find an emotionally fulfilling relationship with someone to whom she feels sexually attracted."
So you think leaving your established family, your kids, your own flesh blood is ok just because your not sexually attracted to partner anymore ? You embody the nature sexual selfishness.
"So in your opinion, "as a gay", homosexuals who are pressured to remain closeted and then, later in life, decide that they can't bear the lying anymore and finally do something about it, are the reason that gay bashings occur. And they deserve it.
You are such a prick."
How we homosexuals present each other is very important. We will come of as selfish if we leave our families just because were not sexually attracted to our original partners. That goes for any sexual orientation. Because you know what ? Its not sex that binds love. Its the heart. And maybe you'll come to realize that one day, I don't know if your gay or straight, but I don't just look at somebody for their body. That is not love, that is getting a boner.
And by the way, as a proud gay man, to call me a prick defeats the purpose of defending somebody like me, so there for you are an enemy in your own circle. Calling me prick will not solve anything, this is type of bullsh!t that gets people shot.
So you think leaving your established family, your kids, your own flesh blood is ok just because your not sexually attracted to partner anymore ? You embody the nature sexual selfishness.
How we homosexuals present each other is very important. We will come of as selfish if we leave our families just because were not sexually attracted to our original partners.
Because you know what ? Its not sex that binds love. Its the heart. And maybe you'll come to realize that one day
And by the way, as a proud gay man, to call me a prick defeats the purpose of defending somebody like me
so there for you are an enemy in your own circle. Calling me prick will not solve anything, this is type of bullsh!t that gets people shot.
"I think that when someone is trapped in a relationship that came about because of a forced closeted sexuality, it's a little more complicated than "just because your [sic] not sexually attracted to partner anymore". And I think that you're confusing "leaving an unfulfilling relationship" with "abandoning your children"."
.....*slight facepalm* But thats the whole point ! Hadmatter.....Don't you hink its a tad far-fecthed that woman was FORCED in the relationship ? The reason why I am presumptuous is because sexual orientation is the issue here ! If it weren't just about sexual orientation, this movie might have even been made.
On a lesser note, if its not just about sexual orientation, than there would be no reason why she should left the family, right ? Because it is clearly the issue. Just Because someone love a member of the same sex, DOES NOT mean your a homosexual.....above all your probably a pan-sexual...
[deleted]
[deleted]
Don't you hink its a tad far-fecthed that woman was FORCED in the relationship ?
The reason why I am presumptuous is because sexual orientation is the issue here ! If it weren't just about sexual orientation, this movie might have even been made.
I have come out as gay in the last 2 months......I have been bisexual for most of teen aged life.
By the way Hadmatter, My heart goes out to you for situation. I am very sad that you feel that way as a homosexual. I hope that you don't think that I'm just trying to sugar coat my past bisexuality....because that is fair and I am sorry I didn't adress that. If you don't believe me.....than I understand.....
"If there was supposed to be a point in those two sentences, you failed."
Well with the exception of leaving "never" before "been made", it actually makes sense. I'll explain by saying that in the film they make sexual orientation the only problem....but apparently it isn't if someone is that desperate to leave their family. Than it is not just a sexual problem than, it is a romantic issue. SO therefore they are contending that sexual orientation determines romantic interest...which logically speaking and despite what most people think of romance is NOT true if a homosexual is willing to marry the opposite sex. Don't tell me that they just did it because they were hiding themselves, because by that point it is clearly not true then. If someone is willing to hide themselves that long, but are romantically interested enough to get married, than its not just about sexual orientation....
By the way Hadmatter, My heart goes out to you for situation. I am very sad that you feel that way as a homosexual.
I'll explain by saying that in the film they make sexual orientation the only problem....but apparently it isn't if someone is that desperate to leave their family. Than it is not just a sexual problem than, it is a romantic issue.
SO therefore they are contending that sexual orientation determines romantic interest...which logically speaking and despite what most people think of romance is NOT true if a homosexual is willing to marry the opposite sex. Don't tell me that they just did it because they were hiding themselves, because by that point it is clearly not true then. If someone is willing to hide themselves that long, but are romantically interested enough to get married, than its not just about sexual orientation....
Ok....than I have missed than total point of the film. I geuss it targeted more of the closested adults, but it just made it look like that MOST homosexauls go through, which didn't seem right.
"What makes you think that they get married out of romantic interest? What makes you think that the marriage is not about trying to change themselves? Because that is often how it works. "
Well gee thats a tough one ! Not to be fisicious, but you don't actually think most of the homosexual population of adults go through this....right ? If so, we will live in a dark world.....kinda sad.
Thank you for showing maturity....i think really needed this for myself, especially from someone who is older. Sorry if i caused you pain in any way...
"This is not to suggest that they have no feelings for their partner, or that they don't love their children. But the situation they are in is based on a lie, and if you can't see that, I don't know what else to tell you. This is not a case of a person in a loving marriage with children who just wakes up one morning and arbitrarily decides to pursue a same-sex relationship. We are talking about closeted adults who have struggled for years to live as heterosexuals, who finally cannot bear the burden any longer, or who finally find the courage to do something that's extremely difficult - not just for themselves but for their families as well."
I'm sorry i still can't contend with this.....I will think on this more
"What makes you think that they get married out of romantic interest? What makes you think that the marriage is not about trying to change themselves? Because that is often how it works."
What makes you think that most closeted adults are like this ? What makes you think that they would marry some random person just to show they aren't gay ? It seems too far-fetched.
[deleted]
Well gee thats a tough one ! Not to be fisicious, but you don't actually think most of the homosexual population of adults go through this....right ? If so, we will live in a dark world.....kinda sad.
Even marry a person that they don't completely love, and have a family.
Why are you assuming that they do not completely love the people they marry? Why does sex have to be part of it?
Are you sexually attracted to your parents? If not, does this mean that you don't completely love them, and are just pretending to?
Geez.
But the fact is that there is a large sexual component to most marriages. Do you honestly not realize that?
I also have no intention of marrying my parents, genius.
[deleted]
The hypotheical straight guys above would have no interest in marrying each other and, most likely, even less interest maintaining a sexual relationship with one another.
Married love is built on romantic feelings and sexual attraction in addition to friendship.
But it doesn't have to be. In fact, there do exist relationships that are stronger and more intense without sex. There are straight guys who would die for each other because they're just that close.
You can't exactly say that their brand of love is somehow inferior to, say, some other straight guy paying a female hooker that he's attracted to for sex.
o who's to say that gays who marry people of the opposite sex are not in similar strong and loving relationships?
Would you be averse to spending large portions of your life in their presence?
Yep. And they're not married, they do not declare romantic love for each other, and do not start families together. So how does this relate to the topic of the thread?
There is no love involved with paying a hooker. So how does this relate to the topic of the thread?
If you are a homosexual, you will never be completely fulfilled by a heterosexual relationship. That's just a fact.
Why are you so determined to find a way for her to be wrong?
What does that have to do with your unwillingness to acknowledge the difference between parental and romantic love? Are you incapable of distinguishing between them?
Because the thread seems to assume that all gays in heterosexual marriages have to be miserable and not at all in love with their partner. It assumes that romantic and/or sexual love is the only one that counts.
I'm just showing that just because someone is not sexually attracted to someone else doesn't mean they don't love them in other ways, perhaps enough to want to spend the rest of their lives together.
So it's a faulty assumption that gays in heterosexual marriages are somehow worse off than any other straight married couple.
And neither would paedophiles or people into bestiality. Sucks for them, huh?
We can't get everything we want in life. The majority of the human race is poor and starving. Three people die every second, often of preventable causes. Lots of people are still forced into arranged marriages. Et cetera.
This has nothing to do with her. I'm speaking in a more general sense.
No, but love is love. No matter what type.
Yes, if that is what you were assuming, you would be wrong. But that's not an assumption I was making, and frankly, this thread is about the woman in the movie, not about all closeted gay people. The argument that I was making was to help the OP understand that leaving her family did not make that woman a bad person, that it didn't mean that she didn't love her family, and that she had compelling reasons for doing what she did.
Oh good, you're one of those wonderful people who love to bring up child and animal rape when discussing homosexuality. How delightful.
The matter of consent doesn't even come into play on the side of the individual, if you're talking about people having to live with someone they're not attracted to and be in an unfulfilling relationship where they are not able to satisfy their sexual urges. I'm just saying that it's not a valid argument, because lots of people do that, and we can't always have what we want. You're saying that some people should be allowed fulfilling sexual lives, while others should not.
And from their point of view of paedophiles and practioners of bestiality, gays just got lucky that they have the whole consent argument to work with. It's not exactly fair, is it?
Bull. There is absolutely no similarity between homosexuality and animal or child rape
You seriously think that it's unfair for gays to consent?
There would be similarity between homosexual rape and animal or child rape.
There would be similarity between homosexuality and bestiality or paeodophilia because it's just about who you're attracted to.
No, and what's this got to do with the topic?
I just think it's unfair that while gays can have a fulfilling relationship because it just so happened that the beings they're attracted to can consent, those who are attracted to beings who just so happen to be unable to consent - which isn't their fault - can't.
Rape is rape. But to compare homosexuality to practices of rape is a deliberate attempt to associate homosexuality with rape.
Then heterosexuality is exactly the same as paedophilia.
Do you think it's unfair that married heterosexual couples can have a fulfilling sexual relationship?
If your argument is that everyone should be allowed to fulfill their sexual needs only if the parties involved are all consensual adult humans, then that's a different argument altogether.
- What do you think of incest between consenting adults?
I have to again respond to hadmatter. While you clearly had the advantage and upperhand in a debate with someone much younger, less knowledgeable and less experienced than you, you really did not show any more maturity than he in making your arguements. One might say that you showed less maturity considering your age and the fact that you were dealing with someone who, with a little bit of tact, you could have educated, rather the berated.
Also, for one who, I believe, claimed to (forgive me for not remembering your exact phrasing) dislike shallowness (you do realize that, regardless of what you believe, having a specific sexual orientation is shallow [oh and god please do not be one of the morons who believes sexual orientation is 100% genetic - when it is rather more like 60-70% genetic] and you simply have not evolved passed that yet), dance clubs, and gay bars (I am hoping your dislike for these types of places is because of the image of drug addiction and promiscuity it associates homosexuals with - even though to an extent, it is sadly relevant), it surprises me then that you would write "I believe that everyone is entitled to be in a fulfilling relationship in which their sexual needs are satisfied."
Now, in making such a comment, robertbilotta had a valid point in bringing up pedaphelia considering that is what these people are sexually attracted to. Therefore, that would mean you do believe that these people are entitled to fulfilling relationships with minors. You really should have added an exception...however, then you start down that slippery slope of deciding at what age a person is able to consent to sex (since laws not only vary from state to state in our own country, but vary quite considerably from nation to nation). Basically, its a more complex issue than you make it out to be, you don't have all the answers, and need to stop acting so holier-than-thou, because it is quite evident in your lack of humility that you are anything BUT.
Furthermore, what this thread may have started out being about is irrelevant. It has evolved (unlike you) beyond that point, and an to attempt to use the origial point of the thread as an arguement was a rather glaring message that you actually had no arguement.
My main problem with you, is that, despite what you think about yourself, you are absolutely no different than the feather/stocking wearing queer-balls who have sex in the bathroom stalls of gay clubs since you believe "... that everyone is entitled to be in a fulfilling relationship in which their sexual needs are satisfied"
That is all fine and dandy, but you were actually the one missing the point robert was trying to make. Not everyone needs a relationship to be sexual (despite your damaged homosexual brain being ill-equipped to comprehend this - were you even aware that there is such a thing as asexuals? No, sounding like the typical homo you are, I am guessing that is beyond your comprehension as well) for it to be fulfilling, nor does sex make a relationship more so: that all depends on the individuals involved. You yourself admitted that there are different types of love, and who is to say which types are superior, better, or more meaningful? That is the point this intelligent (albeit inexperienced - and if you judge someone for being inexperienced, you're nothing more than a hypocrite since experience is relative, and we were all just as inexperienced at some stage in our life) youth was trying to get across to you, yet you wanted to keep bringing sex back into the picture. Psychoanalytically speaking, it seems that despite what you say, sex is a bigger part of your life (and thought process) than it should be.
This may have started out about some movie (that I have not even seen) but it turned into you acting more immature (I did not see Robert slinging personal insults so freely and with as much ease as you seemed to - rather, he stuck to his points - I guess experience doesn't equate to maturity...especially not in your case) than someone far younger than you. You handled the situation horribly, and I do believe you need to reflect.
If it is your intention to do some good and educate, then you need to completely rethink your methods. If it is your intention to be an angry old troll, then, congratulations: just respond with your mailing address and I will send you a blue ribbon.
P.S. - I am an open homosexual. My views on the majority of homosexuals are a result of years of keen observation, realism, and an unsurpassed self-awareness. I am also sorry that you and so many homosexuals have had such a hard time with your sexuality (life is unfair - I personally knew I was gay at the age of 5 and have not once in my 26 years EVER wished I were different than I was in that regard - I guess I am one of the lucky ones). I am on your side. One of the larger reasons (after the billions unncessarily murdered in its name) I despise most popular religion is because of its brain-washing techniques, particularly when it comes to sexual freedom. I am extremely anti-organized religion.
I have to again respond to hadmatter. While you clearly had the advantage and upperhand in a debate with someone much younger, less knowledgeable and less experienced than you, you really did not show any more maturity than he in making your arguements.
Now, in making such a comment, robertbilotta had a valid point in bringing up pedaphelia considering that is what these people are sexually attracted to. Therefore, that would mean you do believe that these people are entitled to fulfilling relationships with minors. You really should have added an exception...
That is all fine and dandy, but you were actually the one missing the point robert was trying to make. Not everyone needs a relationship to be sexual
were you even aware that there is such a thing as asexuals?
You yourself admitted that there are different types of love, and who is to say which types are superior, better, or more meaningful?
Psychoanalytically speaking, it seems that despite what you say, sex is a bigger part of your life (and thought process) than it should be.
This may have started out about some movie (that I have not even seen)
but it turned into you acting more immature
If it is your intention to do some good and educate, then you need to completely rethink your methods.
My views on the majority of homosexuals are a result of years of keen observation, realism, and an unsurpassed self-awareness.
I am also sorry that you and so many homosexuals have had such a hard time with your sexuality
I personally knew I was gay at the age of 5 and have not once in my 26 years EVER wished I were different than I was in that regard
I am on your side.
That is all fine and dandy, but you were actually the one missing the point robert was trying to make. Not everyone needs a relationship to be sexual
"You and rob and Anakin can split hairs all you want, and bring inappropriate sexual practices in to muddle the issue, the same way that religious fundamentalists do when they try to stop gay rights legislation."
Drop it. I have never mentioned child molestation as an argument. It was not wise for them to mention child molestation or animal sex, but they what they should have said was the ATTRACTION to children or bestiality, which is completely fair because again you believe that only consenting adults should have their rights sexually.
"Maybe you don't believe that consenting adults are entitled to pursue a romantic relationship in which everyone's needs are met. Again, that's on you. But it's what I believe."
Not for the sake of raising children that you have already had, I do not believe its justified. Whats more important ? Raising children or getting divorced just for someone she is attracted to ? That would be like if I had a ugly wife which I had seven kids with and then decided to divorce to marry a super model......I rest my case. ;)If your going to bring personality involved or values into this, lets assume that the woman in the movie wanted a women PLUS someone with different morals and values. Now I don't know about you but it didn't look like she was unhappy to the point she was being abused in her heterosexual relationship.......
"She wanted a family. She wanted that relationship, but what she needed was to have that relationship with another woman, because she is homosexual. And I believe that she is entitled to a relationship in which her needs are met"
Again its not justified to leave her family at all.
"Of course. And what does this have to do with anything? Does the existence of asexuals alter the fact that many people have sexual needs? "
No it doesn't. But does that mean most relationships are about or involve sex ?? One big word : NO !
[deleted]
"Apples and Oranges "
Thank you for comparing the complex sexuality and minds of two sentient human beings to that of harvest fruits.....I am dignified.
"Marriage involves TWO people. If one is gay and the other straight, then most likely neither is getting their emotional and sexual needs fulfilled. Is it fair for the heterosexual partner to be married to someone who is not attracted to them romantically or sexually?"
Well apparently the woman was that romantically interested in the man to get married to him.
"Absolutely correct! However, we are talking about marriage, not relationships in general."
Bad choice of words. If we are led by your conclusion, than she is further less justified for what she did. If its about marriage than well she didn't have to leave.
[deleted]
Tell you what, marry someone of a gender to which you have no sexual attraction.
Please keep in mind that sex is part of marriage.
Live with it for a while and get back to us on how satisfied you and your partner both are: emotionally, romantically, and sexually.
I don't see how the emotional and romantic part would be disatisfactory.
[deleted]
Well apparently the woman was that romantically interested in the man to get married to him.
And would you inform your spouse-to-be of this in advance?
[deleted]
Which certainly does nothing to refute the assertion that not too many women would be interested in a sexless marriage. Asexuals represent a very small percentage of the population, and even according to the web site you're pointing to, some of them have sex with their partners!
I eat god for breakfast.
Yeah, well, I'm asexual too, so I'll just find someone. They have meetups and things at that site.
----
www.whoaisnotme.net/
[deleted]
You are especially not qualified to so harshly render judgment on the sexuality of others.
Not for the sake of raising children that you have already had, I do not believe its justified. Whats more important ? Raising children or getting divorced just for someone she is attracted to ?
That would be like if I had a ugly wife which I had seven kids with and then decided to divorce to marry a super model......I rest my case
Again its not justified to leave her family at all.
No it doesn't. But does that mean most relationships are about or involve sex ?? One big word : NO !
No, it would be more like if you had a wife and kids but then decided to divorce in order to be with another man... because you were gay.
It would be different because "Your gender is incompatible with my sexual orientation" is far less trivial than "You got ugly".
I eat god for breakfast.
"Getting divorced does not mean that she wants no involvement in her children's lives. It just means she doesn't want to be married to her husband anymore"
Your reducing the affects of divorce on children by a long shot. As someone who comes from divorced parents, I THINK I might just convey to you how bad it is !
(By the way, I am not trying to deter from the argument, I'm making a point now on the children, so please don't think that I'm trying to gain an upperhand from a lower factor).
But you know what ? Let that go for a second, because My expierence probably won't convince you. I'll just put that this does affect the children in a very bad way, especially in the unusual circumstances that the woman happened to be gay.
Your reducing the affects of divorce on children by a long shot. As someone who comes from divorced parents, I THINK I might just convey to you how bad it is !
(By the way, I am not trying to deter from the argument, I'm making a point now on the children, so please don't think that I'm trying to gain an upperhand from a lower factor).
Wow, I didn't realize that at 26 I wasn't an adult yet. I think we can all realize now that we are dealing with an old troll and why this old man is so angry. Also, he seems to live in a world where everything is black and white. Sorry, the world doesn't work like that. The world is full of gray. Every circumstance is different, every situation is different.
It is also sad that you were unable to allow the discussion to evolve into an intellectual one (which is actually what your two main [three, now, including me] debaters were trying to do), rather, you kept going back to the same, dull, boring points, and seemed totally incapable of stretching your mind beyond them.
However, it does fit the profile of an angry old man. I also have to say, that once you brought up my age, you clinched your profile as one, and cemented your defeat. In my experience, when a person cannot stick to the facts but rather has to bring up an age difference to determine intellect, knowledge, or experience (when everyone knows people experience, mature and learn at vastly different rates than others), it is because they have run out of anything meaningful to say and fall back on the juvenile defense of "Well, I am older, so I am right."
I think you need a hobby (and probably also need to get laid too, LOL). It might get rid of all that anger your are harboring.
Wow, I didn't realize that at 26 I wasn't an adult yet.
I think we can all realize now that we are dealing with an old troll and why this old man is so angry.
Also, he seems to live in a world where everything is black and white. Sorry, the world doesn't work like that. The world is full of gray. Every circumstance is different, every situation is different.
It is also sad that you were unable to allow the discussion to evolve into an intellectual one (which is actually what your two main [three, now, including me] debaters were trying to do), rather, you kept going back to the same, dull, boring points, and seemed totally incapable of stretching your mind beyond them.
I also have to say, that once you brought up my age, you clinched your profile as one, and cemented your defeat.
In my experience, when a person cannot stick to the facts but rather has to bring up an age difference to determine intellect, knowledge, or experience (when everyone knows people experience, mature and learn at vastly different rates than others), it is because they have run out of anything meaningful to say and fall back on the juvenile defense of "Well, I am older, so I am right."
<Yawn>
Your style of writing shows (despite my lack of formal education - I did not need one to learn how to write properly) that you definitely lack either education or intellect. Also, it WAS you who brought up my age first. Do you think I just decided to spout my age out of nowhere? I think YOUR age is the issue, and it is starting to impede you. Go back and read your posts where you question how old I am. Now, I am no genius (well, actually...), but, I do believe that would be a reference to my age: sorry to burst your overly-inflated bubble of an ego.
Once again, you are not in charge of these forums, you do not set the standard on who can reply to what, and what about. At the point of the discussion I had come in on, the topic was already transforming into something different than the original point made. That is usually how conversations (I can tell you don't understand this because you are most likely [based on your way with people] a hermit who doesn't actually have them) work. Therefore, please direct me to where it says I have to comment on your origial points before I proceed to comment on your latter ones? Your arguements are getting more and more pathetic as you painfully attempt (and fail) to debate with someone who, according to you, isn't even an adult yet (though the rest of the world would disagree with you - but I am guessing you are used to that...only, not because you are a misunderstood intellectual, but because you are just an old and bitter troll).
Finally, once again, you are not in charge of what the topic is. I have no clue where you got the idea that you were, but, newsflash, you are a nobody. You are nothing. You are not important to me, or anybody else on these boards, so please, stop trying to tell us what we can and can't do, especially since there is nothing you can do about it.
Out of courtesy, I am very happy to inform you that I have gotten to the point where I have realized you are not worth my time, and I will no longer look for any inane responses from you (and if I should happen across one, I might post them up on the wall at work with all the other comics).
An edit: Also, just to make one thing perfectly clear: you are also a liar/disembler. It is funny how you are able to quote me when you are attempting to make a point, however, when you accuse me of saying something (for example, my first post in a thread involved me calling someone a prick, when rather I said they were acting like one [which was a post involving me defending a poster from people attacking them for asking a simple question, which happens way to often in these forums...and I received many PMs commending me on the very post you are bashing me for, so it shows how out of touch you are, and don't even realize it] - there is a difference, and that is probably why you failed to post it) you are somehow unable to come up with the evidence to back up such a claim. How convenient that must be for you. =)
Also, it WAS you who brought up my age first. Do you think I just decided to spout my age out of nowhere?
Well, you're also talking to a guy who thinks that the liberal in "liberal arts college" means "politically liberal". Plus he still hasn't included any content in any of his responses.
I eat god for breakfast.
Nice rebuttal (the long one) hadmatter.
Handled yourself quite well, I must say..
[deleted]
Hmm, I brought up my age as if it were a badge of honor? Interesting that considering you seem to never fail to quote me, you didn't quote that part. Is it because if you had, everyone would have seen that my mentioning of my age was just that, me saying that in my 26 years I haven't had a problem with my sexuality once. I am trying to figure out how you misconstrued that as me bragging about my age...unless, you are actually the one guilty of the pot calling the kettle black. You on numerous occasions have made point of saying you were older than me (as if that had anything to do with intellect, knowledge, experience, or wisdom). Just in your last thread you made a point of telling me that I need to respect my elders. Why? If you acted like an elder, you might just have gotten that respect. However, considering you have acted no more mature than I, what makes you think you deserve respect for being "an elder?" Please tell me.
Again, I still don't know what your issue is about threads being able to change topic. You see, I am free to comment on anything you say. I am allowed to cherry pick which of the things you say I don't like (you are guilty of doing the same thing to so many other posters, including me, with your annoying little copy-paste quotations) and respond to them, just as you are. So, please, do not tell me that I have to firstly address certain other topics or comments before I can address others that have been raised. Once again, you are the hypocrite, telling others that it is wrong for them to do things you are guilty of. What's even funnier is you, the hypocrite, going around calling everyone else a hypocrite.
As far as my PM to you...it was an attempt to keep pointless bickering off the boards, but now I see you are exactly the troll I pegged you for. You WANT this kind of bickering on the boards, because it's obviously something you live for. I know this especially because you had time to go back through all my other posts on other forums to try to formulate some kind of attack against me. Only a troll with no life would spend so much time and effort fighting with people on these forums. Go back and look at how many times myself, anakin, and the third guy (I don't even recall his handle anymore) you are fighting with have posted, and then count how many times you have posted. You got us all beat. You love this attention: that's the very first sign of a troll. Also, calling me cowardly because I decided it was no longer worth fighting over something as trivial as this? Hmm, again, sounds like a troll's attempt to keep the flame burning.
However, now that I have called you out for the sad, pathetic (oh, and old, yes, lets not forget how old you are - and we know how bitter some old people can get - unfortunately, your bitterness is so overwealming that I think you must be bitter that you are not only old, but have no life, no friends, and nothing better to do than argue on IMDb all day long) troll you truly are, maybe you will crawl back under your rock, because the rest of us, young (and according to you, stupid, because we are not adults, like you, not even at 26) and relatively happy people have lives to live. Mmmkay? Yeah.
Hmm, I brought up my age as if it were a badge of honor? Interesting that considering you seem to never fail to quote me, you didn't quote that part. Is it because if you had, everyone would have seen that my mentioning of my age was just that, me saying that in my 26 years I haven't had a problem with my sexuality once. I am trying to figure out how you misconstrued that as me bragging about my age...unless, you are actually the one guilty of the pot calling the kettle black. You on numerous occasions have made point of saying you were older than me (as if that had anything to do with intellect, knowledge, experience, or wisdom).
Just in your last thread you made a point of telling me that I need to respect my elders. Why? If you acted like an elder, you might just have gotten that respect. However, considering you have acted no more mature than I, what makes you think you deserve respect for being "an elder?" Please tell me.
You see, I am free to comment on anything you say.
As far as my PM to you...it was an attempt to keep pointless bickering off the boards, but now I see you are exactly the troll I pegged you for. You WANT this kind of bickering on the boards, because it's obviously something you live for. I know this especially because you had time to go back through all my other posts on other forums to try to formulate some kind of attack against me.
[deleted]
Don't you hink its a tad far-fecthed that woman was FORCED in the relationship ?
<< So you think leaving your established family, your kids, your own flesh blood is ok just because your not sexually attracted to partner anymore ? You embody the nature sexual selfishness. >>
In the girl's case, I don't believe she had children. And it's not really ideal to stay with a spouse you don't want to just because you're afraid of hurting their feelings. They deserve someone who loves and desires them fully.
No spouse wants to be lied to to that huge an extent, and no spouse wants to hear, "Honey, I've realized I am not attracted to you, and in fact, am not attracted to any man. But because we had a $100,000 wedding, I'll stay with you if you want, and just spread my legs so you can be sexually relieved...though I hope we can keep that to a minimum. Thoughts?"
In the arch bishop's case, he and his ex-wife and children all still love each other very much, and they accept his partner as part of their family.
\
Hadmatter, you sounded intelligent until you called the OP a prick. Was it necessary? Do you have proof he is a prick? Oh, it is just your opinion? Well guess what, so was all what the OP said. So i guess you're a prick as well.
Being homosexual myself, I can see how you found his phrase "as a gay" ironic, however, there is no excuse for immature behavior. Grow up.
Do you have proof he is a prick? Oh, it is just your opinion
"Yes, it is my opinion that blaming gay-bashings on gay people makes the OP a prick."
Just because I have criticisms of peoples moral character involving who they are doesn't make me a prick sir. It was immature of me but calling me a prick was actually surprising coming from you.
"EDIT:
Oh, and isn't it interesting that when I selected one of your previous posts at random, you were calling people "pricks". I think you need to learn the lesson of pots and kettles."
The irony spreads behind the horizon please kindly show me these posts as I can't find them throughout his profile.....
P.S.- i agree with some the things they say but not with the rape issue. That is unacceptable.
Just because I have criticisms of peoples moral character involving who they are doesn't make me a prick sir.
The irony spreads behind the horizon please kindly show me these posts as I can't find them throughout his profile.....
You very may well have seen me use the word. I had no quarrel with you using the word, it was the circumstance in which you brought it out. Unprovoked. If I indeed called someone a prick, you should have read the relevant and previous posts to realize I did so in defense of myself, which I consider different than angry old men (I have now come to realize that is what you are) starting fights when they should be above that.
shareI had no quarrel with you using the word, it was the circumstance in which you brought it out. Unprovoked.
If I indeed called someone a prick, you should have read the relevant and previous posts to realize I did so in defense of myself
which I consider different than angry old men (I have now come to realize that is what you are) starting fights when they should be above that.
Sometimes people have to make very tough choices in order to lead honest lives. It may not seem right, but it's the best choice for them.
Think of it this way: if we did not have such a strong current of homophobia in this country, gay people would be able to come out naturally, instead of leading closeted lives and going so far as marrying people of the opposite sex.
"First you ask if you can be red, knowing that I'm always red."
"That one woman who left her husband and family just to get with some girl ? How selfish and detestable."
Sure, that's not a very cool thing to do but, coming from a straight person, I didn't see that as giving the entire gay community a bad name. They're still human beings that aren't perfect. This kind of things goes on in the straight community too. It's not a good thing, but it happens.
"Just look at the way some famous gays act"
Okay....Look at the way some famous straight people act. Just as bad or worse. Are you just looking for ways to bash gay people? Which seems pretty strange considering you claim to, ya know, be gay.
"I'm sorry But watching this made me want to go straight."
I'm sure the gay community wouldn't shed too many tears if you parted from them.
But what were the alternatives? Though Gephardt's ex-husband was never interviewed, Robbins' ex-wife talked about how hurt she was by his sexual rejection of her. They both would have made their spouses miserable had they stayed together.
shareYou forget that Fileboy that the woman's husband was upset, she even described his agony.
shareYou give morons a bad name. I know plenty of morons that make more sense than you, and now everyone is going to think all morons are this stupid.
I'm just waiting for the sun to shine.
If you are refering to me Josiah, then you couldn't have picked a better way to make your self another raving poster. I had apologized to hadmatter and thanked him for the advice he gave me, so it MIGHT just be helpful to read the damn forum before you have the stupidity spew from your sphincter like mind.
it MIGHT just be helpful to read the damn forum before you have the stupidity spew from your sphincter like mind.
You don't see me starting retarded antagonistic threads, do you?
I'm just waiting for the sun to shine.
"You don't see me starting retarded antagonistic threads, do you?
Facepalm*
AGAin, did you read the forum ? I apologize for what I said to you. That was mean and I'm sorry but calling me atagonistic.....you really couldn't have been so ironic.
Also this thread was not antagonistic if i felt that it was hitting on my sexuality. You are equally atagonistic by calling me a moron....
Seriously. We had a very antagonistic start, but Robert has listened to other points of view. He's a young guy and he had a knee-jerk reaction to one aspect of this film, but I think he really did pay attention to what I and other posters have said on the topic.
I eat god for breakfast.
I only replied to what I read; the original post.
I didn't read the entire thread because it's been my experience
that people don't have a change of heart during Internet debates.
My apologies to Robert for not giving him the benefit of the doubt.
I'm just waiting for the sun to shine.
Because no straight man or woman has ever left their family to be with a member of another sex. If "that one woman who left her husband and family just to get with some girl" is causing you to convert to heterosexuality, then there is a problem with your personal convictions. Meanwhile, on an unrelated note, I will be registering to vote as a Republican this year, as long as it gets me invitations to lesbian bondage nightclubs.
shareI applaud you. Because life is really all about pleasing yourself isn't it. To hell with the kids and husband, only what I want matters. I know plenty of gay people who never let anybody else suffer because of their orientation. People need to stop using their minority status in society as an excuse for hurting others and appalling behaviour.
share