At the same time, young adults are having their first sexual experience later, and having less sex in general. While in 1988, 60% of boys had had sex by the time they were 19, in 2010 that number was 42%, and overall, the number of sexually active 9th graders has dropped by almost half since the 1990s.
In iGen, professor of psychology Jean M. Twenge reports that “In fact, more young adults are not having sex at all”:
More than twice as many iGen’ers and late Millennials (those born in the 1990s) in their early twenties (16%) had not had sex at all since age 18 compared to GenX’ers at the same age (6%). A more sophisticated statistical analysis that included all adults and controlled for age and time period confirmed twice as many ‘adult virgins’ among those born in the 1990s than among those born in the 1960s. . . .
You don’t see the women complaining about it, wise enough to know you can’t shame a person for being clean and virtuous.
“Virgin pride” would mess with the postmodernists. That’d be funny.
Even with age controlled, GenX’ers born in the 1970s report having an average of 10.05 sexual partners in their lifetimes, whereas Millennials and iGen’ers born in the 1990s report having sex with 5.29 partners. So Millennials and iGen’ers, the generations known for quick, casual sex, are actually having sex with fewer people—five fewer, on average.
MSM…. lied to us?
[There are also fewer white people in the younger generations, so fewer options for white people.]
“Demographic transition”, period of high-K coming.
It’s almost like the MGTOW rhetoric of wicked Lilith women/Never Marry is controlled ops to justify SJW controls on expression!
Odds are, their mother is sluttier than the thot they hate.
So Millenials’ and iGen’ers’ frugal, stable, “wholesome,” ways have wrought laudatory behaviors. As the sociologist David Finkelhor argued in an op-ed for The Washington Post, the younger generations are “showing virtues their elders lacked . . . We may look back on today’s youth as relatively virtuous, as the ones who turned the tide on impulsivity and indulgence.”
….and we may look back on you as evil and treasonous?
Anecdotally, she notes, young people seem to be feeling more inhibited about their naked bodies in general, and are even much more likely to change behind closed doors at the gym than older folks. We are surrounded by sex, yet our age feels strangely unsexy; we can explore sex without taboo, but don’t know how to be sensual.
Almost like someone’s trying to use porn as culture to suppress the urge to start a family.
50s women used to wear dresses because they were women, they didn’t want to ‘bone’ you.
Women have the same motive now to be feminine but porn-addled idiots reading into it, ruin it. There is no bait nor hook, our vag is not a Venus Flytrap. But if a Muslim rapes us, we get punished with a lecture about wearing a skirt as surely as if we were in Yemen. Is this The First World? The West is culturally dead by attire. Ghetto/rap/porn culture killed it. The 60s viewed mini-skirts as just …skirts, girlish even! Our crime is being white, the motive – evil, obviously. That’s why women are voting right-wing.
Like, you want girls to wear pearl necklaces, stop making the same dead joke. It isn’t funny. Porn culture puts women off. Don’t speak to normal women explicitly. It’s a rule of etiquette women are taught but no longer men. The same way gross-out female comedians piss you off, that’s the pearl necklace joke. No coincidence it’s conservative clothing they try to trigger disgust with. Like men as ‘hipsters’ for not being on display for gays.
At least in the 80s, men wore suits to clubs, women full dresses (I own some).
As Julian further observes, the fact that young people are having less sex may bespeak not only a decline in physical intimacy, but in the kind ofemotional intimacy that leads to relationships of every kind.
“Nevertheless these cases
are only exaggerations of the common fact that the female produces offspring of two sexes which sometimes differ from
each other in a wonderful manner.”
“In some instances the males
alone, in other instances both males and females, have been observed thus to differ in a slight degree. When the differ-
ences are rather more strongly marked, and when both sexes and all ages are affected, the forms are ranked by all
entomologists as good species.”
SEXUAL SELECTION 101 If the numbers be wholly kept down by the causes just indi- cated, as will often have been the case, natural selection will be powerless in certain beneficial directions; but this is no valid objection to its efficiency at other times and in other ways; for we are far from having any reason to suppose that many species ever undergo modification and improvement at the same time in the same area. SEXUAL SELECTION. Inasmuch as peculiarities often appear under domestica- tion in one sex and become hereditarily attached to that sex, so no doubt it will be under nature. Thus it is rendered pos- sible for the two sexes to be modified through natural selec- tion in relation to different habits of life, as is sometimes the case ; or for one sex to be modified in relation to the other sex, as commonly occurs. This leads me to say a few words on what I have called Sexual Selection. This form of selec- tion depends, not on a struggle for existence in relation to other organic beings or to external conditions, but on a struggle between the individuals of one sex, generally the males, for the possession of the other sex. The result is not death to the unsuccessful competitor, but few or no offspring. Sexual selection is, therefore, less rigorous than natural se- lection. Generally, the most vigorous males, those which are best fitted for their places in nature, will leave most progeny. But in many cases, victory depends not so much on general vigour, as on having special weapons, confined to the male sex. A hornless stag or spurless cock would have a poor chance of leaving numerous offspring. Sexual selection, by always allowing the victor to breed, might surely give in- domitable courage, length to the spur, and strength to the wing to strike in the spurred leg, in nearly the same manner as does the brutal cockfighter by the careful selection of his best cocks.
Among other mentions throughout and in other books of his.
The first edition of Psychopathia Sexualis (1886) presented four categories of what Krafft-Ebing called “cerebral neuroses”:
paradoxia — sexual desire at the wrong time of life
anesthesia — insufficient sexual desire
hyperesthesia — excessive sexual desire
paraesthesia — misdirected sexual desire (e.g., homosexuality/bisexuality, sexual fetishism, sadism, masochism, and pedophilia)
(Okay so maybe Freud just let them say it without correction but that’s still taking someone else’s credit). Freud cited this guy in his writings (might’ve been the basis for many theories) and didn’t really bother correcting the public.
That or people who credit Kinsey* (Twink BDSM enthusiast on the taxpayer dollar of his office basement with a keen interest in child sexuality) with “inventing” sexology. A century later.
Forget Freud. Today, we’re snooping around the personal archives of Richard von Krafft-Ebing, a 19th century psychoanalyst and sexologist extraordinaire who history has often been forgotten despite his groundbreaking research in sexual pathology. His chef d’oeuvre is undoubtedly Psychopathia Sexualis, the book thatmade jaws drop across Europe in 1886 and the first-ever scientific study on sexual deviation. “For almost one hundred years,” explains psychologist and sex researcher Dr. Joseph LoPiccolo, it “stood as the world’s most informative volume on the subject of sexual deviation.”
Krafft-Ebing’s research preceded Freud’s by decades, and Sexualis included over 238 case studies exploring “sexually deviant activities” like sadism, masochism, fetishism and more. Plus, he coined the term “anilingus”.
Deviance and degeneracy? This guy made it science.
they’re actually the only archives we have from the eccentric sexologist (whose seminars were described as “showy,” “glamorous” and “highly sensational”).
*fraudulent data aside
This guy is like the Tesla of sexology to Freud or Kinsey’s Edison.
Also Ellis. Havelock Ellis.
This is like how people remember Freud as inventing psychology when he actually invented psychiatry (as a medical doctor). William Wundt invented psychology.
They remember Newton’s studies but think Goethe was a poet.
They don’t know who Emilie du Chatelet was but remember Voltaire.
They know Pavlov and not William James.
Nobody ever ever ever EVER talks about Sir Galton.
One of the greatest minds of all time. Newton would be impressed with Galton.
Nobody mentions it.
Francis Bacon is superior in all ways to Albert Einstein.
Sir Scruton is a living example of ignored genius.
It ruins your pair bond. Accept it and forgo use (you shouldn’t need medically and do not need psychologically) or don’t complain when you’re a bitter divorcee. A crack addiction is less harmful to marriages than a porn one because crack addicts admit they have a problem and society (including marriage counselors!) doesn’t tell them it’s good for them! A marriage is literally a pair bond enforced with sexual monogamy, there is nothing else. That is what the religious vow and the law bind. They bind the two individuals before there is a bond between them and the marriage is the bond’s maintenance.
It’s considered the man’s duty to keep a marriage good because they are the ones sexually performing. If they cannot perform and maintain the bond, if they are impotent, what marriage is there exactly? This was the Catholic Church’s position!
How does porn ruin marriage? [I hate these posts, might stop doing them.]
Porn user = Incompetent husband. (I’d say the same thing about an addicted wife). You should be working out any kind of sexual energy on the spouse, that’s their role. At least, masturbate in private and not directing those vital energies outside the marital bed.
The male typical skills valued in the marriage are lost.
“her male partner’s low engagement, responsiveness, and accessibility in their relationship was predicted by his pornography use”
Insecure attachment predicts divorce, it can literally simulate a damaged childhood.
“The vital point is that our pair bonding penchant arises from physiological events, not mere social conditioning. It evolved from the infant-caregiver mechanism, and the two mechanisms still overlap in the brain’s reward circuitry. So, even though many Westerners appear to be caught up in a chaotic hook-up culture for the moment, it doesn’t mean that we humans are, by nature, as promiscuous as bonobo chimps or that pair-bonding inclinations are superficial cultural constructs.”
The Sexual Revolution was a lie and water is wet.
“In short, if you are hooking up with multiple partners purely for recreation you could be an outlier. Your behavior is not typical human behavior—a point that is easily overlooked by Western researchers.”
It’s an addiction, a valid reason to terminate a marriage, Biblical adultery aside.
The heart of all addictions is selfishness.
“Online sexual activities, including pornography use, have drastically increased in recent
years. Many studies have examined the impact that pornography use can have on marriages and
families. One of the key findings has been that pornography use can negatively impact trust in
relationships. This study focused on understanding the mechanisms involved when a husband’s
pornography use negatively impacts his marital relationship and his wife’s emotional well-being“
That’s called emotional abuse.
The selfishness of addiction is such that they will always expect it to go one way. Of course, when you’re married you are no longer an individual and this is why selfishness becomes the worst possible sin. What you take for yourself, you take from your spouse.
A taste of their own medicine may be warranted, since that’s the one way the stupider men can learn if all else fails.
If the woman wants to teach him what it’s like, just flirt with any man more attractive than him when he’s around and tell him it isn’t your fault, it’s evolution. Or sitting there ogling pictures of Channing Tatum in that stripper film, maybe frame it on a wall and stare.
He can’t get defensive, the guy isn’t really there, in the bedroom.
Or masturbate to gay porn where both men are better looking than he is.
It’s just porn, right? No big deal, no reason to get upset. It’s just energy he was never going to require from you anyway, right? It isn’t like you owe him 100% as part of the marriage thing or there’s less to go around for him or there’s an insult against him personally in the act at all. Right?
“(1) a breakdown of expectations and assumptions central to the marriage, (2) a sense of distance or disconnection from their husband and (3) a general sense of being emotionally and psychologically unsafe and insecure in their relationship. Further, it was found that loss of trust was greatly influenced by the sexual nature of pornography and the deceit surrounding its use. These two factors combined to produce a loss of secure attachment, particularly for attachment-oriented and attachment-idealizing wives, who hold the belief that pornography use is not appropriate.”
You don’t get to change the rules after they were agreed upon. You show me one woman who would marry a porn addict if she knew that beforehand.
It’s cheating, the brain doesn’t know the difference. A man who needs porn to get it up or orgasm is impotent, by dictionary definition.
It’s poor performance with a real life woman, the wife in this case.
“A common problem among men characterized by the consistent inability to sustain an erection sufficient for sexual intercourse or the inability to achieve ejaculation, or both. Impotence can vary.
So if they can’t get it up to their wife, but they can still do it to a mistress or porn, they are still impotent. This is basic medical fact. They can train other circuits but there is still an impaired circuit, the only important one.
It can involve a total inability to achieve an erection or ejaculation, an inconsistent ability to do so, or a tendency to sustain only very brief erections.”
That performance failure of male duty used to be sufficient reason to get divorced when the Catholic Church was in power, that’s how major it is.
The man’s sexual function in a marriage is more important than the wife’s participation. To blame the woman for his chosen addiction is weak.
If he can’t get it up, that’s his body. She isn’t controlling it Svengali style. He needs a doctor.
“Overall, it was found that a husband’s involvement with pornography can result in a lack of emotional, psychological, and physical availability and responsiveness, and a decrease in closeness and intimacy.”
Exactly the same result as literally going out and screwing those women. Note the type of porn they watch is intended for you to replace the male “actor”, it’s psychological cheating.
It’s voyeurism too, would voyeurism IRL not be cheating somehow?
Masturbation isn’t so much the problem, masturbation and pornography use/addiction are completely separate things. If he can’t masturbate without porn, which is almost always the case… he has a problem.
“Interacting with the impact of deceit, a spouse’s pornography use clearly provides ample opportunity for the breakdown of secure attachment at a level that can be classified as an attachment rupture or trauma.”
Same result as literal adultery. HD videos trick the brain into treating events as real. It’s worse than real actually, it’s a supernormal stimulus. He wouldn’t film himself screwing one of those women, would he? No, that would seem extreme…..
“Analyses uncovered three attachment-related impacts from husbands’ pornography use and deception: (1) the development of an attachment fault line in the relationship, stemming from perceived attachment infidelity; (2) followed by a widening attachment rift arising from wives’ sense of distance and disconnection from their husbands; (3) culminating in attachment estrangement from a sense of being emotionally and psychologically unsafe in the relationship. Overall, wives reported global mistrust indicative of attachment breakdown.
Well, escalation involves going out and literally re-enacting it. So yes, practice?
If a spouse practiced murdering you for fun, you’d feel less safe. This abandonment threat is very real and backed up by all metrics, as you’ll see.
Building on this data, we build an attachment-informed model of effects of pornography use and concomitant deception in the pair-bond relationship.”
Pornography is literally clinically damaging to the user.
It does cause ED (PC term for impotence, amazing how men resent un-PC terms on anything relating to them…)
“Traditional factors that once explained men’s sexual difficulties appear insufficient to account for the sharp rise in erectile dysfunction, delayed ejaculation, decreased sexual satisfaction, and diminished libido during partnered sex in men under 40.”
“Alterations to the brain’s motivational system are explored as a possible etiology underlying pornography-related sexual dysfunctions.”
Aforementioned training of responses.
“This review also considers evidence that Internet pornography’s unique properties (limitless novelty, potential for easy escalation to more extreme material, video format, etc.) may be potent enough
I see what you did there. Subtle. I like it.
to condition sexual arousal to aspects of Internet pornography use that do not readily transition to real-life partners, such that sex with desired partners may not register as meeting expectations and arousal declines.”
Husband’s sexual failure. He might as well cut it off, as far as his wife’s concerned, because he’s preventing her from working with it by breaking its healthy function.
She literally cannot do her job, far from it being her fault.
He also makes his own satisfaction impossible, which is deserved all things considered.
It’s like a cocaine user complaining their nose doesn’t work.
Cause and effect doesn’t stop at particles, mate.
“Clinical reports suggest that terminating Internet pornography use is sometimes sufficient to reverse negative effects, underscoring the need for extensive investigation using methodologies that have subjects remove the variable of Internet pornography use.
Translation: they don’t want to look “sex negative” i.e. medically realistic.
If a sex therapist tells you to use porn to spice up your marriage, run.
They make more money off divorced sluts, remember!
I mean, if Elon can be turned off by Amber, this is some major shit we’re dealing with here. Impotence isn’t really a laughing matter. Okay, maybe one prod…
Hardness! Hardness! My billions for some consistent hardness!
Had to get that out of my system. In many cases, the original cause is guilt and the outcome is depression. Since the cause is guilt, the depression is never resolved. Therapists are pussies in this century.
In the interim, a simple diagnostic protocol for assessing patients with porn-induced sexual dysfunction is put forth.”
Translation: we know it’s bad but we don’t know what to do.
“A significant postulate of this commentary is that all addictions create, in addition to chemical changes in the brain, anatomical and pathological changes which result in various manifestations of cerebral dysfunction collectively labeled hypofrontal syndromes. In these syndromes, the underlying defect, reduced to its simplest description, is damage to the “braking system” of the brain. They are well known to clinical neuroscientists, especially neurologists and neurosurgeons, for they are also seen with tumors, strokes, and trauma. Indeed, anatomically, loss of these frontal control systems is most apparent following trauma, exemplified by progressive atrophy of the frontal lobes seen in serial MRI scans over time.”
In short, no, they cannot make the decision for themselves to continue its use.
That’s like letting a suicidal person cut themselves, also an addiction.
No, they are not allowed that choice. It isn’t a choice. They have to stop.
I know it’s hard. Or at least it would be, if they’d stop.
Compare it to a bad sex diet.
” Ironically, a common correlate of pornography use has been found to be a damaged marital sex life.”
No, it makes them worse lovers. Obviously it would, it’s calling doing it not watching it.
Porn has no educational value. There are books and damn, cartoons even depicting and describing positions. Women have no problem viewing those and magazines are full of them. You aren’t supposed to be distracting yourself with masturbation while studying.
“Elliott and Umberson (2008) investigated this very subject, the nature of sex in marriage, and found that 94% of their participants established that sex is a keystone and integral part of marital success; and furthermore, describe sex as a barometer of the health of their marriage.
No, it isn’t just orgasms. It isn’t just sex.
Consequently, marital sexuality also creates a context for potential harm where that vulnerability is not held by one spouse with complete fidelity and trustworthiness.“
Porn’s purpose is clear, it’s cheating intellectually. It’s reverse cuckoldry, in a way. They get off, but on the fact they’re picturing themselves doing it with another, instead of actually viewing their Other with someone else. They’re poles apart but very similar.
“Many authors (Brezsnyak & Whisman, 2004; Regan, 2000: Sprecher, 2002; Leavitt & Willoughby, 2015) have found that sexual desire plays an integral role in the marital satisfaction. Consistently, respondents who perceive their marriage to be “happy,” report creating positive experiences within their relationships, tend to label sexual interactions as one way to facilitate and nurture closeness and intimacy with their partners (Impett, Strachman, Finkel, & Gable, 2008).”
My advice to those women is to stream gay porn constantly without doing anything. After all, it’s “entertainment”, like a film? No need to object.
I cannot be bothered to look up any more for now. The fact this is a subject of discussion is ridiculous, none of you have bothered to look it up.
In medical terms, a thing is harmful until proven healthy. That’s never going to happen with porn but they tried.
“A review of the research that does exist was undertaken and many negative trends were revealed. While much remains unknown about the impact of Internet pornography on marriages and families, the available data provide an informed starting point for policy makers, educators, clinicians, and researchers.”
Men are pathetic in direct proportion to their sexual desperation.
Porn is causing that, all the attributes of the pajama boy.
It weakens you as men.
Back to the under-covered attachment thing, briefly.
A few studies on how insecure attachment styles (like those caused by porn) make divorce almost a dead-cert. The marriage is over the first time you click online instead of turning to your spouse, really.
“attachment style, as a personality trait, has implications for the higher divorce rate. The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between attachment style and marrying multiple times. The findings indicate that multiple marriers are more likely to be avoidantly attached and less likely to be anxiously attached. Additionally, those marrying for the first time to a previously married person have similar insecure attachment Styles.”
“Husbands’ lower initial level of marital satisfaction measured around the first child’s transition to school was the only significant predictor of marital dissolution.”
Yep, the dude’s fault again.
“In one study of dating relationships, Kirkpatrick and Hazan (1994) found that in a 4-year period, individuals with a secure attachment style had more stable and committed relationships than those with insecure attachment styles. A 31-year longitudinal study (Klohnen & Bera, 1998) revealed similar results.”
You might say, oh, but how do we know porn is making it worse? A fair objection. The methodology would be unpopular but ethical and possible. You study the child’s attachment when it forms and record it throughout the teens, also recording initiation into pornography addiction. If previously secure boys become insecurely attached men, porn is literally ruining men for women by reducing the husband qualities required.
Study women too, that’s fair. It’s just hardly any will statistically count as porn addicts.
If women are to follow their husbands in anything, they must feel supported.
This study revealed that low levels of perceived spousal support among women characterized as ambivalent were associated with significant declines in marital satisfaction for both the women and their husbands.
Porn takes that away, as studies above show. This is not a minor point. It would be like going to a mechanic that hates cars or a hydrophobic plumber. If something’s wrong, you’d leave it to fester.
How does it work?
The woman senses this emptiness from the man first before he feels the effect on the pair bond between the two of them.
“Another possibility is that attachment security buffers against declines in marital satisfaction, such that the differences between secure and insecure individuals become larger over time.”
This study extends the existing adult literature on insecure attachment as a predictor of depression and anxiety by examining these pathways in a sample of adolescents. In addition, dysfunctional attitudes and low self-esteem were tested as mediators of the association between insecure attachment and symptoms of depression and anxiety. Youth (N =350; 6th–10th graders) completed self-report measures of attachment, dysfunctional attitudes, self-esteem, and symptoms of depression and anxiety in a 4-wave prospective study. Results indicate that anxious and avoidant attachment each predicted changes in both depression and anxiety (after controlling for initial symptom levels). The association between anxious attachment, but not avoidant attachment, and later internalizing symptoms was mediated by dysfunctional attitudes and low self-esteem. Effects remained even after controlling for initial co-occurring symptoms.
Also no spouse to blame.
Imagine if women had some ailment with their mammary glands and blamed their husband. Impotent men who blame the wife are insane, it’s completely disconnected from reality.
In fact, improper attachment may contribute to mental diseases.
Specifically, we review research findings showing that attachment insecurity is a major contributor to mental disorders, and that the enhancement of attachment security can facilitate amelioration of psychopathology.
Yes, they can make their spouse suffer. The personality changes caused by the porn are inherently abusive, more in common with a psychopath (psychopaths are almost entirely porn-addicted).
Recent models have moved towards the incorporation of neurodevelopmental, biological and psychosocial approaches to human development. Consequently, there has been a significant conceptual shift, where social experience is currently seen to play a role in shaping the biology and genetic programming of human development,
hence any damage from minors viewing porn is at least somewhat permanent
This is not a church lady problem, it’s worse than drugging kids who hate school. Those seldom cause damage like that, it’s psychological circumcision. It’s horrifying. Addictions disable the mind.
The priming to bring in young boys too, by showcasing schoolgirls. The grooming element of that, imagine a parade of schoolboy porn*, the MRAs would have a field day. Imagine that was considered normal in society, how sick that society must be.
*If it does exist, don’t tell me. Please, I’ve suffered enough.
rather than the simple ‘unfolding’ of a predetermined sequence of developmental stages. In the case of human infants, developmental models need to account for the increasingly recognised contribution of the infant to the social environment and their capacity to interact with and shape environmental responses.
Training. Training their own brain by their chosen habits.
The resilience required of a spouse, especially a husband, is wanting.
“According to Sroufe (2000), securely attached children are fundamentally different from those classified as insecurely attached. At two years of age, they are more likely to be enthusiastic and persistent in solving easy tasks”
Useful in a marriage….
“Secure school-age children are more sympathetic to peer distress, more assertive about getting their needs met, more likely to be leaders, are better prepared for school”
Useful skills in a future husband.
insecure attachments (i.e., “attachment trauma”)
A child with a history of an insecure attachment may struggle with trusting the intentions and emotional responsiveness of others
So ironically they cause this in spouses with deceitful and demeaning behaviours (including requests of humiliating performance from the spouse to compete with literal whores) pushing them away to validate the paranoia. Yes, that’s what borderlines do too. It’s sadistic. They enjoy breaking people. Testing their limits, crushing their self-respect.
may learn to cope with stressful stimuli by inhibiting strong feelings
Cheating of any sort is a punishment to the existing spouse. Passive aggression is still aggression.
are more likely to have behavior problems, poor peer relations, and lack resilience
problems includes addictions, FYI
Resilience is the number one required quality in a husband.
“Although epigenetic changes are usually temporary, they involve alterations in the proteins that bind together the long strands of DNA. Thus, they can sometimes be handed down to offspring. According to the hypothesis, homosexuality may be a carry-over from one’s parents’ own prenatal resistance to the hormones of the opposite sex.”
Great man, unusual number of homosexual offspring.
“The initial benefit to the parents may explain why the trait of homosexuality persists throughout evolution, he says.”
Evolution presumes the fit ones will breed more (reducing the downside loss to zero as 52:48 female to male birth ratio) and there’s no parasitism between high and low fitness.
There are other studies along these lines e.g. a review
It’s always the men being the most degenerate, generic finding of sexology.
And they wonder why they die sooner.
Big winners, bigger losers.
“This article reviews the evidence regarding prenatal influences of gonadal steroids on human sexual orientation, as well as sex-typed childhood behaviors that predict subsequent sexual orientation.”
But it doesn’t work the other way around, parent forcing a Barbie on your son.
And it isn’t 1:1, kids will play with most things if allowed.
“The evidence supports a role for prenatal testosterone exposure in the development of sex-typed interests in childhood, as well as in sexual orientation in later life, at least for some individuals.”
Yay, we can blame men! – feminists, if they had any balls
“It appears, however, that other factors,”
“in addition to hormones, play an important role in determining sexual orientation.”
“These factors have not been well-characterized,”
Pathogens, billions of pathogens.
“but possibilities include direct genetic effects, and effects of maternal factors during pregnancy. “
You can try blaming the woman but you’d be wrong. If women were responsible, nobody would be straight because everyone has a mother, and therefore a cause. We wrongly assume anything “wrong” with a baby is the mother’s fault. This is like blaming your food poisoning on the oven rather than the handling before that stage (paternal factors, research the other half too, paternal factors!) or once it comes out.
Paternal degeneracy would be an interesting factor. A very interesting factor.
Are promiscuous men* likelier to have gay sons, easy observational study.
You’d essentially be testing for r-selection. Homosexual men are extreme sexual r-types: high volume, low discrimination, nomadic patterning…
“Although a role for hormones during early development has been established, it also appears that there may be multiple pathways to a given sexual orientation outcome and some of these pathways may not involve hormones.”
Where’s the science, right?
How would it occur from father to germline like an STD, mother to child or both?
Straight men are the ultimate catch for gays, there are forums discussing poaching them. (1)
Porn has been used this entire time. Any unusual form of sex will be twisted as queer.
Now it’s you can give oral to a man and not be gay, despite gay men being defined by that.
Next, it’s anal or fingering or rimming. For women, it was kiss a girl and like it.
Anything bro is tainted, pun intended. It will always end up a sexual lure. That’s the male weakness. Notice how many “BRO-triarchy” alt right writers are totally homosexual and anti-family? The fellowship of the bros thing has one purpose: trap straight men into a gay orgy. No girls allowed. Call it a Viking bonding experience and drug them. A false flag “party” because rape victims saying they were drunk get no sympathy.
Suddenly, all the misogyny makes sense!
Have you counted how disproportionately “pagan” men are homo? Did this ring NO bells for you whatsoever? All the night time, strong alcohol bonding experiences in the middle of nowhere didn’t twitch your sense of rape danger?
BTW, oral sex (with anyone) unprotected is leading to the spread of STDs, more than any other kind.
“Don’t knock it until you tried it” assumes everyone is pansexual or whatever the trendy term for slut without standards is. It assumes you can’t be trusted to know your own sexuality.
“Yeah. it’s quite possible to turn a str8 man gay.
Out of sheer curiosity, the right situation, and the right person can easily tunr a str8 gay man gay.”
Believe us now?
“Merely thinking about it doesn’t make you gay but when thought turns into a reality then you have yourself a whole different story. Alot of str8 guys are under the assumption that merely getting head from another guy doesn’t make them gay. It’s a nice ythought but they are wrong and usually those are the kind of guys woyu wanna be weary of because they don’t seem to unbderstand the sexual nature of what it is to be gay.”
Yeah, you want the hardest catch, the really straight ones!
Use your Google-fu, Neo!
The most common question most str8 guys ask are “Do guys do it better?”. 
What the F do you think they’re going to say?
It’s like asking the Big Bad Wolf what you taste like.
Do not ask a sexual predator if they’re good in bed!
No, they don’t. I asked some very, very, very, very slutty bi guys.
That’s why they tend to settle with women and prefer dating women.
In technical terms, the disease risk is high, they’re normally high and come too quickly and they’re completely selfish lovers.
Did we all learn something today? Good.
Look up the predatory questions.
Men are in as much danger as women.
Fact: Brotherhoods are totally straight and family-oriented, they are father support groups. Anything less is not a brotherhood, you cannot have a brotherhood of bachelors (a school or monastery) or gays (that’s call a sex club or a gay bar).
Musical interlude to ponder this issue.
Update: the “it’s what you’re attracted to” thing (lie) is like trying to measure the financial cost of window shopping. It isn’t shopping. For the same reason daydreaming about UFOs doesn’t mean you were abducted. Sexuality is Darwinian, objective and observable behaviour. Anything else, is something else and unscientific emotional appeal. They say that, the sexual predators, to exploit curiosity. None of the phrases about curiosity are positive (kill the cat).
Bringing alcohol into it changes nothing. It also implies consent issues. And what, do all gay men need to be off their face, that’s insulting…?
A penguin doesn’t feel “attraction” and attraction isn’t a mental process, it’s a physical one. Sexuality is an instinctive drive. You can have the hots for someone you do not like as a human being, they are separate. Lust is not love. You can’t ask a gay penguin what it’s attracted to or what it kids itself into identifying with for social desirability (lie).
If you are physically capable of performing certain acts with a type of person, that is ALL sexuality is. If you cannot muster the physical capability (psychological and physiological) then you are not that thing.
To avoid confusion and despicable lies.
A homosexual man is physically capable of performing sexual acts with men and not women.
A bisexual man is physically capable of performing sexual acts with either men or women.
A heterosexual man is only physically capable of performing sexual acts with women and not men.
IS ANY OF THAT HARD TO UNDERSTAND?
Stop kidding yourselves. The fact you’re happy to watch a man fucking in porn (not repulsed, disgusted, turned off) shows a lot of these men are bi and in denial. There is no curiosity. If you’re curious, you are bi. Stop with the denial.
It’s like saying you tried cuckoldry at an orgy. No, you are a cuck. It is defined by practice. The Hollywood orgy types are literally all cucks. Elon sharing Amber round like a joint is a cuck, Talulah sharing round Elon is a cuck. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuckquean That is literally all it is.
The “try something before deciding you don’t like it” thing is ridiculous. If you kill a few people to see if you like it and change your mind, are you any less a serial killer? In most interviews, they admit to just trying it out, that’s their motive. If you do heroin, five times and drop it, are you less a heroin user? You cannot magically scrub yourself clean of bad behaviours by writing it up as a “mistake” like Cindy from CA, life doesn’t work like that. It’s called a delusion. It’s still a part of you and always will be.
So much for the “don’t be ashamed” or “if you disapprove you must secretly be one” group.
We are the most oppressed people sexually in all of history, because we are lied to, encouraged to put ourselves in vulnerable, easily abused positions because other people like the idea of it (we should perform it for them) and we cannot openly discuss sexual disgust and interpersonal repulsion. Yay, so free! I feel liberated, don’t you!?
Where saying No makes the targeted party feel bad.
Say No to the wrong lech and you might get arrested for a hate crime.
Everybody belongs to everybody else? No. No means no. Old people are not entitled to young ones, ugly to good-looking, fat to thin, gay to straight. No is the only word you need to master and if you can’t, you’re a slave. A slave is a person who cannot refuse.
Any wonder young people are striking? Passivity is the punishment.
Since you cannot explain, you are not allowed to say anything.
Discernment is a gift of perception, the biggest contributor of intelligence. To not notice something is to be dumb, dense and stupid. There’s a false perception there’s nothing there e.g. race. It’s conformist, you’re not supposed to see, Asch’s lines. PC is a status signal, how much can you afford to pretend the danger isn’t there? It’s a cultural game of chicken.
It’s an inverted prudence, what is prudent socially is politically correct but what is prudent for the individual and its success and survival is denial of PC. As celebrities go down one after another for betraying the ingroup, the societal priorities will shift. Even the Boomer concept of playboy in James Bond is no longer respected, he’s a thug in a suit. History is grinding it down to throw it away.
Do not feel sorry for these outdated people, they wanted a false reality. They are pretending to be and stay ignorant in the internet era. They won’t look around them. They had a lot of thanatos, they wanted danger. Don’t be stupid, don’t help them, do not be a martyr. If they had absolute power, they’d shoot you in the head against a wall for denying the Party Line. You owe them nothing, wherever they live. Be totally passive, the way they’ve been. When they have any problem, do nothing, be useless.
They wished for this world.
Let them have it.
They’re starting to go after celebrities now for not dating minorities.
BNW, this is worse. Peer pressure rape, yay, how liberating.
This is all the entitled do, rape. To forcibly take.
To take away your choice to say no, I don’t want this.
To take your money or property for their use (criminal conversion).
To take your body and autonomy.
Invasions are a rape, including the sexual but by no means limited.
Who has the most rights? Who has the most legal power? Not the natives? That’s called oppression.