Record numbers of Western citizens identify as LGBTQ

[InChristAlone]

I do think that having a baby is a role, in that it is in most cases a choice; a choice that both a biological male and female decide upon. It is the female that has to experience the potential pains of childbirth, which is just one of the myriad of reasons I discourage anyone from making that choice. I'm not sure if I agree that "women are more nurturing than men biologically" since I haven't seen the evidence to support that, or I would argue that it is very much another case of social conditioning overwriting the potential of what we could be.. From my personal experience, I feel like I have that nurturing behavior and hope that one day I will be prepared to take on the responsibility of adoption with a reliable partner.

"Trans" is an umbrella term for a variety of different individuals, some are not at all interested in transitioning or making dramatic changes to their body, it may just be enough to take on the role for them to feel comfortable, or rather they are fine with their body but not with how they are expressing themselves. Gender is a fluid concept, while biological sex isn't, except in the cases of people that are intersex or experience mild to complete forms of androgenic insensitivity. Our identity is both from ourselves and our interaction with culture. For example, let us say we live in a society that prevented you from actively worshipping God, that denied you rights or categorized you as having some "condition" because you believe in God.. In your mind you would still have your identity with God regardless of what society or culture demands you to do, or how to be. The concept of identity is more than just biology here, it is how we live, how we view the world, ourselves and others.


I don't know, I certainly wouldn't feel obligated nor would I have the right to answer for other people on something so personal..

I can agree that the concept of identity is more than just our biology- our identity is in Jesus Christ (the greatest love story ever told), but I cannot agree that gender is fluid. You are just creating a new definition for gender to fit your personal desires and then trying to get everyone else to adopt that new definition. It's not working on those who are grounded in Truth. It is only working on those who believe in moral relativism, that truth is subjective and no one can tell anyone what they are doing is wrong. Except moral relativists are hypocrites, if I believe there is an objective morality they will tell me I'm wrong, negating their belief that morality is subjective. That might go over a lot of people's heads but please think about it.

Here are some more quotes from that Dr. Wilson nutritional balancing website:
In talking about yin disease:
"Truth is not one of the values of people who are very yin. Instead, they often believe in the doctrine of moral relativism. This is the idea that there really is no right or wrong, and truth is relative and personal. This leads to a very confused life and is also very harmful for society."

"Those who are too yin are often sexually loose. Some are celibate or monogamous, but they all usually oppose any restrictions or even discipline in this area. "

"They have a very Mother-centered religious orientation, rather than a Father-centered orientation, as Jesus and the Jewish religions speak about. This can be a rebellion against fathers, and rebelliousness is another of their primary doctrines. Many are still rebellious teens in grown up bodies."

"Those who are very yin often cannot eat much red meat, as their digestion is weak. They often become what Dr. Paul Eck called obligatory vegetarians. That is, they cannot eat much meat due to poor health, so they are obligated to become more vegetarian."

"Their “spirituality”, he said, is often just copper toxicity. Their “love” and “peace” are often just brain fog due to not eating enough animal protein or a balanced diet. And they are dupes for some of the worst criminals on the planet who want us all weak, tired, depressed, angry and in despair."

In talking about homosexuality:
"Many scientific studies show that the standard family with one man and one woman is best for raising a child. Other arrangements result in more mental and physical problems for children. Therefore, society should protect and promote heterosexual marriage and the traditional family, and not other arrangements. All other arguments can be seen as just a matter of selfishness and disregard for the next generation."

"The reasons homosexuality is very harmful for individuals and society include:

- Cleanliness, in the case of male homosexuality. The anal region of the body is not designed for sexual relations and is the filthiest area of the body. Homosexual relations between men easily spreads hundreds of diseases.

- Subtle energy imbalance. The energy field of a man and a woman blend well together. We explain the power of this blending in the articles about Down Sex and Down Hugging. This is extremely important for development and health.

- Child-bearing and child-raising. These are basic functions of society that are more difficult with homosexual relationships.

- To help preserve the sacredness of the family unit. The relationship between husband and wife and the family unit are the basis of all societies. Some don’t agree with this, but we do not think you can find an advanced civilization that does not endorse and support this idea.

Homosexuality seriously weakens traditional marriage laws and concepts, and therefore greatly weakens the fabric of society.
In fact, in earth history, any society that endorses homosexuality ends soon afterwards."

 

[Morgan]

I can agree that the concept of identity is more than just our biology- our identity is in Jesus Christ (the greatest love story ever told), but I cannot agree that gender is fluid. You are just creating a new definition for gender to fit your personal desires and then trying to get everyone else to adopt that new definition. It's not working on those who are grounded in Truth. It is only working on those who believe in moral relativism, that truth is subjective and no one can tell anyone what they are doing is wrong. Except moral relativists are hypocrites, if I believe there is an objective morality they will tell me I'm wrong, negating their belief that morality is subjective. That might go over a lot of people's heads but please think about it.

Here are some more quotes from that Dr. Wilson nutritional balancing website:
In talking about yin disease:
"Truth is not one of the values of people who are very yin. Instead, they often believe in the doctrine of moral relativism. This is the idea that there really is no right or wrong, and truth is relative and personal. This leads to a very confused life and is also very harmful for society."

"Those who are too yin are often sexually loose. Some are celibate or monogamous, but they all usually oppose any restrictions or even discipline in this area. "

"They have a very Mother-centered religious orientation, rather than a Father-centered orientation, as Jesus and the Jewish religions speak about. This can be a rebellion against fathers, and rebelliousness is another of their primary doctrines. Many are still rebellious teens in grown up bodies."

"Those who are very yin often cannot eat much red meat, as their digestion is weak. They often become what Dr. Paul Eck called obligatory vegetarians. That is, they cannot eat much meat due to poor health, so they are obligated to become more vegetarian."

"Their “spirituality”, he said, is often just copper toxicity. Their “love” and “peace” are often just brain fog due to not eating enough animal protein or a balanced diet. And they are dupes for some of the worst criminals on the planet who want us all weak, tired, depressed, angry and in despair."

In talking about homosexuality:
"Many scientific studies show that the standard family with one man and one woman is best for raising a child. Other arrangements result in more mental and physical problems for children. Therefore, society should protect and promote heterosexual marriage and the traditional family, and not other arrangements. All other arguments can be seen as just a matter of selfishness and disregard for the next generation."

"The reasons homosexuality is very harmful for individuals and society include:

- Cleanliness, in the case of male homosexuality. The anal region of the body is not designed for sexual relations and is the filthiest area of the body. Homosexual relations between men easily spreads hundreds of diseases.

- Subtle energy imbalance. The energy field of a man and a woman blend well together. We explain the power of this blending in the articles about Down Sex and Down Hugging. This is extremely important for development and health.

- Child-bearing and child-raising. These are basic functions of society that are more difficult with homosexual relationships.

- To help preserve the sacredness of the family unit. The relationship between husband and wife and the family unit are the basis of all societies. Some don’t agree with this, but we do not think you can find an advanced civilization that does not endorse and support this idea.

Homosexuality seriously weakens traditional marriage laws and concepts, and therefore greatly weakens the fabric of society.
In fact, in earth history, any society that endorses homosexuality ends soon afterwards."

Well, I'm not a moral relativist at all, I am personally a moral absolutist in that I believe in the process of finding what is ultimately right or wrong. Its just that what I perceive as being right isn't compatible with our culture nor the direction and history of civilization; it is not compatible with the continuation of the current system that I would call "evil". Although, I know that what I see as right would most likely be disagreed upon by most people, and would be at odds with what fundamentally drives life.

Dr. Wilson seems to be creating a straw man or caricature of something that they perceive as being wrong, but I will try to address some their statements.

"Truth is not one of the values of people who are very yin. Instead, they often believe in the doctrine of moral relativism. This is the idea that there really is no right or wrong, and truth is relative and personal. This leads to a very confused life and is also very harmful for society." - There are truths that are relative and personal, then there are truths that are not, such as that life intrinsically involves suffering and that we will die. “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.” J. Krishnamurti(1975)

"Those who are too yin are often sexually loose. Some are celibate or monogamous, but they all usually oppose any restrictions or even discipline in this area. " - I believe it is incredibly harmful to undermine the joys of non reproductive sexuality amongst consenting adults, to create a culture that purposefully gates the potential bonding that may occur between individuals. Just like eating quality or nutritious food, too much of anything can be problematic.

"They have a very Mother-centered religious orientation, rather than a Father-centered orientation, as Jesus and the Jewish religions speak about. This can be a rebellion against fathers, and rebelliousness is another of their primary doctrines. Many are still rebellious teens in grown up bodies." - Being rebellious against an injustice or what you perceive as morally wrong can certainly feel liberating.

"Their “spirituality”, he said, is often just copper toxicity. Their “love” and “peace” are often just brain fog due to not eating enough animal protein or a balanced diet. And they are dupes for some of the worst criminals on the planet who want us all weak, tired, depressed, angry and in despair." - Here he is, basically setting up a straw man to attack and then making a connection with "criminals" of all walks of life.

"Many scientific studies show that the standard family with one man and one woman is best for raising a child. Other arrangements result in more mental and physical problems for children. Therefore, society should protect and promote heterosexual marriage and the traditional family, and not other arrangements. All other arguments can be seen as just a matter of selfishness and disregard for the next generation." - In fairness of the argument presented I can't truly say, but I haven't seen any proper scientific study that actually shows this. How would one even begin to test that when I see so many problems that children have in "traditional" families; there are so many variables, how exactly would you create a control group? What about class, other environmental factors like location, interactions with culture? I'm sure you have read what Ray Peat has said about studies that are purposefully create in order to condition a biased result, "academic authoritarians". What people need is a loving home and environment that allows for them to develop at their own pace, to pursue their curiosities and interests, to create and hopefully interact with a healthy and supportive culture.. This is what most people never had even under our "traditional" system.

"Cleanliness, in the case of male homosexuality. The anal region of the body is not designed for sexual relations and is the filthiest area of the body. Homosexual relations between men easily spreads hundreds of diseases." - Any sexual activity, heterosexual or homosexual, that involves penetration should be done with cleanliness or protection in mind, and when one has control of their health it is generally easier to be in control of cleanliness. That very sensitive region tends to keep itself clean when you have control of your health and body, the colon is not involved in penetration, just like hopefully the bladder isn't involved..

"To help preserve the sacredness of the family unit. The relationship between husband and wife and the family unit are the basis of all societies. Some don’t agree with this, but we do not think you can find an advanced civilization that does not endorse and support this idea." - An "advanced civilization"...? I'm sorry to say, but when I look back through history all I see is horror, every so called "advanced civilization" acts like a predator that feasts upon the land until nothing is left and then it collapses like Rome. Is it not possible that we have just been doing some things fundamentally wrong for the majority of recorded human history? Maybe human beings are just inherently flawed because nature is as well? If that's the case then why would I support the continuation of that concept of "sacredness"?

"In fact, in earth history, any society that endorses homosexuality ends soon afterwards." - The impossibility of infinite growth on a finite planet is what ends societies, it just so happens that cultures reach a point of personal freedom before that inevitable failure occurs. There is an agenda to grow and reproduce in order to conquer an subdue your environment and neighbors, but just like a failing metabolism it eventually cannot support its cancerous growth and collapses.

 

[InChristAlone]

Well, I'm not a moral relativist at all, I am personally a moral absolutist in that I believe in the process of finding what is ultimately right or wrong. Its just that what I perceive as being right isn't compatible with our culture nor the direction and history of civilization; it is not compatible with the continuation of the current system that I would call "evil". Although, I know that what I see as right would most likely be disagreed upon by most people, and would be at odds with what fundamentally drives life.

Dr. Wilson seems to be creating a straw man or caricature of something that they perceive as being wrong, but I will try to address some their statements.

"Truth is not one of the values of people who are very yin. Instead, they often believe in the doctrine of moral relativism. This is the idea that there really is no right or wrong, and truth is relative and personal. This leads to a very confused life and is also very harmful for society." - There are truths that are relative and personal, then there are truths that are not, such as that life intrinsically involves suffering and that we will die. “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.” J. Krishnamurti(1975)

"Those who are too yin are often sexually loose. Some are celibate or monogamous, but they all usually oppose any restrictions or even discipline in this area. " - I believe it is incredibly harmful to undermine the joys of non reproductive sexuality amongst consenting adults, to create a culture that purposefully gates the potential bonding that may occur between individuals. Just like eating quality or nutritious food, too much of anything can be problematic.

"They have a very Mother-centered religious orientation, rather than a Father-centered orientation, as Jesus and the Jewish religions speak about. This can be a rebellion against fathers, and rebelliousness is another of their primary doctrines. Many are still rebellious teens in grown up bodies." - Being rebellious against an injustice or what you perceive as morally wrong can certainly feel liberating.

"Their “spirituality”, he said, is often just copper toxicity. Their “love” and “peace” are often just brain fog due to not eating enough animal protein or a balanced diet. And they are dupes for some of the worst criminals on the planet who want us all weak, tired, depressed, angry and in despair." - Here he is, basically setting up a straw man to attack and then making a connection with "criminals" of all walks of life.

"Many scientific studies show that the standard family with one man and one woman is best for raising a child. Other arrangements result in more mental and physical problems for children. Therefore, society should protect and promote heterosexual marriage and the traditional family, and not other arrangements. All other arguments can be seen as just a matter of selfishness and disregard for the next generation." - In fairness of the argument presented I can't truly say, but I haven't seen any proper scientific study that actually shows this. How would one even begin to test that when I see so many problems that children have in "traditional" families; there are so many variables, how exactly would you create a control group? What about class, other environmental factors like location, interactions with culture? I'm sure you have read what Ray Peat has said about studies that are purposefully create in order to condition a biased result, "academic authoritarians". What people need is a loving home and environment that allows for them to develop at their own pace, to pursue their curiosities and interests, to create and hopefully interact with a healthy and supportive culture.. This is what most people never had even under our "traditional" system.

"Cleanliness, in the case of male homosexuality. The anal region of the body is not designed for sexual relations and is the filthiest area of the body. Homosexual relations between men easily spreads hundreds of diseases." - Any sexual activity, heterosexual or homosexual, that involves penetration should be done with cleanliness or protection in mind, and when one has control of their health it is generally easier to be in control of cleanliness. That very sensitive region tends to keep itself clean when you have control of your health and body, the colon is not involved in penetration, just like hopefully the bladder isn't involved..

"To help preserve the sacredness of the family unit. The relationship between husband and wife and the family unit are the basis of all societies. Some don’t agree with this, but we do not think you can find an advanced civilization that does not endorse and support this idea." - An "advanced civilization"...? I'm sorry to say, but when I look back through history all I see is horror, every so called "advanced civilization" acts like a predator that feasts upon the land until nothing is left and then it collapses like Rome. Is it not possible that we have just been doing some things fundamentally wrong for the majority of recorded human history? Maybe human beings are just inherently flawed because nature is as well? If that's the case then why would I support the continuation of that concept of "sacredness"?

"In fact, in earth history, any society that endorses homosexuality ends soon afterwards." - The impossibility of infinite growth on a finite planet is what ends societies, it just so happens that cultures reach a point of personal freedom before that inevitable failure occurs. There is an agenda to grow and reproduce in order to conquer an subdue your environment and neighbors, but just like a failing metabolism it eventually cannot support its cancerous growth and collapses.

It isn't moral absolutism if what you believe to be right and wrong is different than what most to be right or wrong. That would be moral relativism, what's right and wrong for you are your own truth and no one can tell you otherwise. That's what I've been saying since the beginning of this thread. Everyone who argues for the LGBTQ community is a moral relativist. And just so we are clear Christians believe it is an abomination to have sex with the same sex and that marriage was created by God to be between man and woman. Not sure if you read my previous posts, but those were my arguments.

And I understand the opposite viewpoint, I myself was a liberal for about 6 yrs, during which time my family was falling apart. If you go back through this thread you can see how I came to God and how truth was revealed to me.

We cannot make up our own truth on what is right and wrong. Then we would be claiming we have power like God. And if anyone says that times have just changed, that isn't true. In ancient times homosexuality was rampant. And they were having consensual homosexual relationships as well. Rome was extremely open sexually. This has all been tried before. There is nothing new under the sun. Traditional marital roles protect women and children. I don't know many in the LGBTQ community that don't have a history of sex abuse, trauma, single parent, divorce or alcoholic drug addicted parent. The only one I know of personally was Becket Cook, he grew up in a loving home, he could have been exposed to too much estrogen in the womb, but whatever the case may be we live in a fallen world. He is celibate because he knows in his heart having sex with men is wrong. Nothing he can do can change that truth. And he doesn't want to, he says his relationship with Jesus is far greater than any sex he's had with any man. "You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free".

when I look back through history all I see is horror, every so called "advanced civilization" acts like a predator that feasts upon the land until nothing is left and then it collapses like Rome

This sounds like the person Dr Wilson describing on the Yin disease page.
"Many who are very yin see the mass of humanity as “bad”, while the earth, the animals and the plants are good. This belief is called misanthropy, or hatred of human beings. This causes severe conflict, since they, themselves, are humans. Many secretly hate themselves, in other words, due to all the harm humanity commits against mother earth and her animals and plants. This is made worse by their belief in collective salvation."

"In their confusion and guilt, they see little hope for planet earth and some believe and teach that “the earth is dying”. This is not true, but it is a popular doctrine taught in high schools and colleges to vulnerable, yin bodies. It corresponds to what they feel living inside their sick bodies. The false doctrine that the earth is dying may appeal to some because it corresponds to the feelings inside their own bodies that are sadly often dying, even in their teens."

It's a very interesting article: by Lawrence Wilson, MD

And it can be fixed if you will give up the yin lifestyle. I am in the process myself as I have turned to God. Traumas surface when you give up the yin things in your life and this is often very painful, but is necessary for personal development.

 

[aniciete]

View: https://twitter.com/saragonzalestx/status/1582398497185099776?s=46&t=bkJWJKdUVZ57vzS1R1BQXg

 

[Sweatshop Toad]

View: https://twitter.com/saragonzalestx/status/1582398497185099776?s=46&t=bkJWJKdUVZ57vzS1R1BQXg

You vill sacrifice your children to Moloch and you vill be happy.

 

[Adf]

View: https://twitter.com/saragonzalestx/status/1582398497185099776?s=46&t=bkJWJKdUVZ57vzS1R1BQXg

That's disgusting, Not at all suitable for children. This looks like the (d)evolution of media brainwashing focused at children over the years.

I've been questioning media (music) brainwashing since I was a child. I would ask my sister (she still being a child at the time also) Why do you like this music? As she sang songs like 'hit me baby one more time', and 'if you wanna be my lover, you gotta get with my friends'. Most Britney Spears and Spice Girls songs are not child appropriate, and the lyrics are very adult and dark in some cases. Yet they were/are marketed to children. My sister dealt with severe depression for years. I wonder how many children these famous 'artists' are leading to depression.

The more you question the lyrics of mainstream songs pushed on children, the more corruption you see in the mainstream music. This has apparently been a thing for decades because my mum listens to old timey radio, and they play 'hit' songs just as bad if not worse from the 50's..

I heard this one earlier this year on the radio...
'
Seven little girls sitting in the back seat
Hugging and a-kissing with Fred
I said "why don't one of you come up and sit beside me?"
And this is what the seven girls said

[Chorus]
(All together now, one, two, three)
(Keep you mind on your drivin')
(Keep you hands on the wheel)
(Keep your snoopy eyes on the road ahead)
(We're having fun sitting in the back seat kissing and a-hugging with Fred)
(Dee doody doom doom, dee doody doom doom)
(Dee doody doom doom, DOOM)
'

It's more than a bit suss. I've heard a few old 'hits' from the 50's and 60's on old timey radio that were very pedophilic. Seems like this decades old corruption may be playing a role in creating adults who think it's okay to do that in front of children.

 

[Morgan]

View: https://twitter.com/saragonzalestx/status/1582398497185099776?s=46&t=bkJWJKdUVZ57vzS1R1BQXg

Firstly, the most offensive thing here is the music; secondly, who even attends such an "event"? What parents would even go there, especially with their children? That is the failure that I see, that is where the blame resides. Culturally speaking though, society has been exposing children to an array of mature topics for quite some time, if anyone here grew up in either the 80s or 90s they would have been constantly taunted by sexualized(mostly heterosexual) images from garbage pop "music" to film casually displaying content without warning.. and this is especially true to boys, in that women are often sexualized on screen or in any media. I can recall going to school and seeing how different the dress code is between the sexes, and of course this became especially apparent into high school; from crop tops to short shorts, to even something like "cheerleading", and this would even be the case with the staff or teachers.. The question is then, which proceeds the other? Where was the outcry then? Where is it now..?

Neither is acceptable, but we must use these anecdotal events in order to generate political capital, to write pointless stories, to support some aimless ideology, to distract and divide. Because our society can't function without hypocrisy, and history simply doesn't exist.

 

[Adf]

Neither is acceptable, but we must use these anecdotal events in order to generate political capital, to write pointless stories, to support some aimless ideology, to distract and divide. Because our society can't function without hypocrisy, and history simply doesn't exist.

I agree with exactly this. Most of this and many of the events in the mainstream (including the recent 'pandemic') is to distract and divide people from the most serious issue.

Why has most of the population stopped talking about Epstein and the worldwide child trafficking that is still happening? We discuss it here but we're fringe. Why aren't there daily mass worldwide protests demanding all governments to disclose all the Epstein data and conduct serious investigation made public? Because by design they have the population distracted, protesting forced vaccines and anything else. It is awfully convenient we were hit by a global pandemic just shortly after the Epstein news went global. The general population unconsciously think the issues displayed in the media is worse or more important than the Epstein business, because the news downplays the importance of the trafficking.

I think the Epstein business is potentially worse than even WWII or at least on the same level. The worlds richest people and leaders, involved with kidnapping thousands or potentially hundreds of thousands of children worldwide a year, for decades. I wonder if the total number is high in the millions or even close to the hundred millions? This is the subject everyone should be mass protesting about. Demanding to see the investigation and arrests of the millionaires, billionaires and government officials involved. But no, by design there is only crickets.

The difference in coverage and the general publics interest between the Maxwell trial and Depp vs Herd says it all. Maxwell had crickets, was discussed a little bit, and didn't even last that long. Depp vs Herd was all that was talked about for months.

We're all nice little sheep, no matter how much we want to believe we aren't.

 

[-Luke-]

I agree with exactly this. Most of this and many of the events in the mainstream (including the recent 'pandemic') is to distract and divide people from the most serious issue.

Why has most of the population stopped talking about Epstein and the worldwide child trafficking that is still happening? We discuss it here but we're fringe. Why aren't there daily mass worldwide protests demanding all governments to disclose all the Epstein data and conduct serious investigation made public? Because by design they have the population distracted, protesting forced vaccines and anything else. It is awfully convenient we were hit by a global pandemic just shortly after the Epstein news went global. The general population unconsciously think the issues displayed in the media is worse or more important than the Epstein business, because the news downplays the importance of the trafficking.

I think the Epstein business is potentially worse than even WWII or at least on the same level. The worlds richest people and leaders, involved with kidnapping thousands or potentially hundreds of thousands of children worldwide a year, for decades. I wonder if the total number is high in the millions or even close to the hundred millions? This is the subject everyone should be mass protesting about. Demanding to see the investigation and arrests of the millionaires, billionaires and government officials involved. But no, by design there is only crickets.

The difference in coverage and the general publics interest between the Maxwell trial and Depp vs Herd says it all. Maxwell had crickets, was discussed a little bit, and didn't even last that long. Depp vs Herd was all that was talked about for months.

We're all nice little sheep, no matter how much we want to believe we aren't.

It's pretty concerning to me how strongly the media "upped" the distraction game even within the last ten years. I haven't owned a functioning tv since 2014 now, but there still is one in my old room at my parent's house. A few months ago I visited my parents over the weekend and got so bored, that I turned on the tv for almost the whole saturday. It was bad before 2014, when I watched tv pretty regularly, and I didn't have any illusions about the quality of tv programs. But even with no illusions I was pretty shocked about all the junk that is on tv now.

It's easy to see why so many people are "nice little sheep" nowadays and why they are divided. There are at least a handful of shows (probably way more) on German tv that basically ridicule unemployed people and generally people from "lower social classes". And I guess that's not different in other European countries, USA, Australia, Canada etc. I have wondered for a long time why so many (lower) middle class people can sympathize with billionaires and celebrities, but not with people that earn $500 a months less than themselves, even though the former live in a completely different bubble and the latter live just around the corner. But if you just watch tv for one or two hours, it's easy to see why that is. The fate of Johnny Depp or Amber Heard, depending on whose side people are, is deeply moving to a lot of people, but not the fate of a trafficked and raped child with no name. What's not on the news, doesn't exist or isn't important.

 

[Luann]

It's pretty concerning to me how strongly the media "upped" the distraction game even within the last ten years.

have wondered for a long time why so many (lower) middle class people can sympathize with billionaires and celebrities, but not with people that earn $500 a months less than themselves,

Amen. I want to cut back on the news watching. It sours us against each other. The more we fear other people, the less we can organize ourselves.

I've plugged Alfie Kohn on here before... I'm almost finished with his book The Brighter Side of Human Nature and it's great

 

[Adf]

It's pretty concerning to me how strongly the media "upped" the distraction game even within the last ten years. I haven't owned a functioning tv since 2014 now, but there still is one in my old room at my parent's house. A few months ago I visited my parents over the weekend and got so bored, that I turned on the tv for almost the whole saturday. It was bad before 2014, when I watched tv pretty regularly, and I didn't have any illusions about the quality of tv programs. But even with no illusions I was pretty shocked about all the junk that is on tv now.

It's easy to see why so many people are "nice little sheep" nowadays and why they are divided. There are at least a handful of shows (probably way more) on German tv that basically ridicule unemployed people and generally people from "lower social classes".

I haven't watched standard TV in a long time, but I'd imagine it's the same in Australia where I am. Bringing up German media and class issues reminds me of the really good, but unsettling movie, Das Experiment. Where normal everyday people are placed in a prison for an experiment. Some people are assigned as inmates and some are assigned to be guards, and they started embracing those roles. The people assigned as guards began abusing the people assigned as inmates, even though they weren't really guards or criminals. Even creepier is it's loosely based on a real life experiment that happened in the US.

But if you just watch tv for one or two hours, it's easy to see why that is. The fate of Johnny Depp or Amber Heard, depending on whose side people are, is deeply moving to a lot of people, but not the fate of a trafficked and raped child with no name. What's not on the news, doesn't exist or isn't important.

Yes it's very frustrating to me. Most of the people I know will say things like "It's sad that it's happening but It doesn't directly affect me personally and there's nothing we can do", whenever a serious topic like trafficking comes up. Or they won't even allow themselves to see the evidence, and say it's a load of bull. The conversation of the truly important non mainstream topics is shut down instantly. But when it comes to anything that is all over the news, such as the Depp vs Herd trial, but really any fluff that hits mainstream news, it's non stop talk of their opinions on it.

Ah such is life.

 

[Runenight201]

My best friend all through high school ended up coming out at 19 much to all of our surprise. When we got more into the weeds of it our conversation went something like this:

Me: "I remember when I was 6 years old I saw a pretty girl and caught feelings for her"

Him: "Same for me except it was a boy"

Both of us grew up in conservative Catholic households. Went to Catholic school till we graduated. Being openly gay in a Catholic school wouldn't have been the best look for him...which is why he was closeted until he went to college.

I recall Peat's newsletter where rats fed a poor diet by the 3rd generation started exhibiting homosexual and autistic behaviors. I do believe there is some biological priming occurring from the moment of conception based on the vitality of the sperm and egg and continually reinforced through the subsequent development from the nutritional inputs.

I also believe there is nothing wrong with being gay. Imagine how ignorant you'd have to be for shaming someone because of their skin color, I see it as an immutable characteristic (in most cases) you're just born with. There's still apparently that one anecdote here where that one dude turned straight apparently through optimizing their hormones. Well I'm all for optimizing hormones and if it turns out that when gay people optimizing their hormones by and large they all turn straight then maybe I'll be more convinced it's not so strongly immutable, but for where I'm at right now you're just born either gay or straight. Christ there's hundreds of thousands of orphans and troubled kids in terrible homes with ***t heterosexual parents, I'd take a responsible gay couple raising a child with love over an emotionally toxic physically abusive mother/father combo any day of the week.

 

[Adf]

My best friend all through high school ended up coming out at 19 much to all of our surprise. When we got more into the weeds of it our conversation went something like this:

Me: "I remember when I was 6 years old I saw a pretty girl and caught feelings for her"

Him: "Same for me except it was a boy"

Both of us grew up in conservative Catholic households. Went to Catholic school till we graduated. Being openly gay in a Catholic school wouldn't have been the best look for him...which is why he was closeted until he went to college.

I recall Peat's newsletter where rats fed a poor diet by the 3rd generation started exhibiting homosexual and autistic behaviors. I do believe there is some biological priming occurring from the moment of conception based on the vitality of the sperm and egg and continually reinforced through the subsequent development from the nutritional inputs.

I also believe there is nothing wrong with being gay. Imagine how ignorant you'd have to be for shaming someone because of their skin color, I see it as an immutable characteristic (in most cases) you're just born with. There's still apparently that one anecdote here where that one dude turned straight apparently through optimizing their hormones. Well I'm all for optimizing hormones and if it turns out that when gay people optimizing their hormones by and large they all turn straight then maybe I'll be more convinced it's not so strongly immutable, but for where I'm at right now you're just born either gay or straight. Christ there's hundreds of thousands of orphans and troubled kids in terrible homes with ***t heterosexual parents, I'd take a responsible gay couple raising a child with love over an emotionally toxic physically abusive mother/father combo any day of the week.

As a person who grew up with alcoholic, often times frightening heterosexual mother, I would have preferred two stable fathers to that.

 

[aniciete]

View: https://twitter.com/myst_mx9/status/1607401871739879429?s=46&t=7pNWRW3Yo1u_TTtZnqPccg

 

[Regina]

View: https://twitter.com/peterdukephoto/status/1623737869306331136

 

[Sweatshop Toad]

View: https://twitter.com/peterdukephoto/status/1623737869306331136

Crikey!

 

[aniciete]

View: https://twitter.com/babygravy9/status/1624805529171427330?s=46&t=TACzJAsZ6I6Yc3CMaIe3Dg

 

[aniciete]

Very very sad. They are all victims.
View: https://twitter.com/aryancrazyfrog/status/1624877493579546626?s=46&t=TACzJAsZ6I6Yc3CMaIe3Dg

 

[aniciete]

View: https://twitter.com/troonytoons/status/1627049830823657473?s=46&t=hvUitTwTOMj_gLsUO8RBlA


View: https://twitter.com/troonytoons/status/1597591217277046784?s=46&t=hvUitTwTOMj_gLsUO8RBlA

 

[bendis]

what about muscular bearded gay men who looks very manly I believe its very common in those types to be gay