Are fat homos worse than sucking cock?

I'll repeat what I said earlier in this thread. The most vile gay-bashers are often that way because they are suppressing their homosexual urges. They probably even had some homosexual experiences when they were younger and now they are desperate to prove to themselves and everyone else how straight they are by hating the gays.

Your posts are so full of emotion that it's pretty obvious that this is the case with you.

How many cocks did you suck as a teenager? 5? 10?

We won't tell anyone. You'll feel better if you get it off your chest.

Remember, kids:

If everybody on an internet forum hates your guts and thinks you're a mouth-breathing ****tard, claim that you manipulated them into thinking you're stupid! That will show them!

Also, continue to exhibit the same behavior that put you in that position to begin with. You don't ever want to admit that you're wrong when it was proven to be the case months ago.

I get that you don't like him because he's a douche, but where did you get this gay basher repressing urges thing? Please provide study or link.

Here's a dilemma for houstonwhodat:


If you suck one penis to the point of ejaculation, homosexuality will cease to exist (or if you truly desire, only exceptionally attractive lesbians who have bisexual tendencies remain).


What would be your decision?

HoustonMikePriefer would rather go with the nuclear option, I think.

Haha really? Link?
Posted via Mobile Device

Dude, just roll with it.

I made it up just to mess with him because he is such a douche.

However, there are lots of examples of politicians with extreme anti-gay positions who get caught having gay sex, so the theory is not as far-fetched as you might think.

For example:

http://www.sott.net/article/258308-1...ught-Being-Gay

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1638201.html

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/to...n-one-website/

I've heard it a lot before and you're said it several times, so I wondered if there was something I missed.

Opposing same sex marriage isn't a sign of being anti-gay (much less, "extreme[ly] anti-gay") any more than owning a small business that only employs white people is anti-black. There are even out of the closet gays who oppose same sex marriage.

It's been scientifically proven houstonwhodat loves the cock. Google it.

LMAO

Well, it turns out that there is a study that was published in 1996 in the Journal of Abnormal Psychology. A link to it can be found on the Psychology Today web site: http://my.psychologytoday.com/files/u47/Henry_et_al.pdf

It took me 5 minutes with Google to find this. I'd be surprised if there aren't other studies out there.

So, thanks for asking me to look that up. Now I do have a link to support my position. :)

I tend to agree. But that's a relatively narrow interpretation of what I said. I wasn't speaking about opposition to same sex marriage, I was referring to people who are militantly anti-gay to the point that they get extremely emotional about it and send a message of intolerance that reaches the level of hatred.

I will always believe that Fred Phelps sucked a dick or two before he "saw the light".

Guys, he can't be gay. He sets his DVR for beauty pageants and swimsuit shoots. Plus, the number of threads he's started with generic hot chick photos bodes well for him.

He's just an angry guy that has most likely failed repeatedly at heterosexual relationships and hasn't had intercourse with a living, breathing female in a number of years.

LMAO

I know my wife hates it when I have SNL blaring on the TV when we're having sex. That's probably why.

LMAO

ROFL I need to get in on this WhoDat beatdown. Somebody tag me in!

LMAO

That's awesome.

I work with a dude who won't even eat a hot dog, or peanuts, walnuts, nuts in general because of the implication. Weird, but hilarious.

Also, I worked a guy who was bitter and angry all the time, he hated everyone and everything. He was an absolute terror to work for. Then one day, he came out of the closet, and became one of the nicest guys in the building. Daddy just needed some cock apparently, like Houstondodatindabutt needs.

Out of curiosity, why are the skinny ones better, IYO?

Easier for him to get to the meat.

No, I'm serious. I would think that someone so vociferously anti-homosexual wouldn't make qualifications.

And, are there others?

OHHHHH YEAHHHHH!

http://clutch.mtv.com/wp-content/upl...ld-stunner.gif

GETCHA SOME, BUCK-O!

http://www.pitch.com/imager/wrestlem...elbow_drop.jpg

I think it might be time for us to all request wrasslur names again.

If you were talking about the Fred Phelps of the world when you mentioned "extreme anti-gay positions" I wouldn't have a problem with it, but some of your links pointed to politicians whose supposed big transgression was their opposition to same sex marriage.

http://badmouth.net/top-five-republi...-sex-scandals/

Haggard is the funniest one to me. I remember when that guy got "popped"

Wait, WTF does the Q stand for?

LGBTQ

Repost

tell me more

Sounds good.

Why shouldn't I do that?

http://community.ebay.com/ebay01/att...e.tumblr-1.gif

:hmmm: interdasting

Well it's TIME, it's TIME, it's loochy TIME TIME TIME

http://i.imgur.com/bDntC.gif

Why does this have almost 700 posts on a football board? (plus one, oops)

"straight" supporters still in the closet?

Haggard is the only one of those examples that seems legitately anti-gay. Opposing same sex marriage, opposing gay adoption, and opposing expansion of hate crime legislation aren't anti-gay on their face.

Lol, what??? Well they certainly aren't pro gay, or even Indiffent towards gays. In fact, they spent their time, and taxpayers money opposing anything to do with gays that would be a positive in gays life.
Btw...

Oppose:

: to disagree with or disapprove of (something or someone)

: to compete against (someone) : to be an opponent of (someone)

: to try to stop or defeat (something)

Same. I had to Google her.

A definition only helps if you apply it correctly.

If a congressman sponsored a bill that opposed allowing people who were over the age of 80 to adopt, it wouldn't necessarily be evidence that he is anti-old people. It would more likely be that he didn't think it was in the interest of the child to have parents that might be on the verge of dropping dead.

There are rational arguments that can be made against same-sex marriage, gay adoption and gay hate crimes that have nothing to do with being anti-gay. Haggard's position on the other hand, that gays are an abomination, is directly focused on the "gay" itself.

wondering if harrasing GoChiefs for years if he were queer made him a man

.

Hell yeah!!!! It has been past time for that.

Queer.

Not you, the Q....

I would love to hear some of these "rational" arguments against same-sex marriage, gay adoption, and gay hate crimes.

She's kind of annoying, as an actress.

If you believe that it's important to promote procreation and child rearing in intact nuclear families, it's rational to promote the kinds of living arrangements that make that most likely. One way to do it is to give special benefits to traditional marriages, but not to people who choose to live life in other arrangements (single, cohabitation, same sex couples, three or more adult partners, etc.).

If you believe that a child is best served by having a parent of each sex who live together in a committed relationship, then opposing adoption by single people or gay couples or groups of three or more is rational.

If you believe that the perpetrator of a cold blooded murder for cash or for revenge or for any other reason should face the same penalties as that of a cold blooded murder based on the hatred of a particular class of people, then opposition to hate crimes legislation is rational.

None of these require you to dislike or disapprove of gay people. I'd love to hear a response from you that isn't based on your own opinion about how convincing these reasons are.

Yeah, I looked it up. Really edgy...

Yup. Marginally talented with a narrow range of acting abilities. Why is this news?

Better yet, why the F am I commenting?

My dog shat foil this morning and it was hanging out of his butt. Does Ellen Page care? Good, we're even.

That's some foil d gras we can all understand

Your dog is a hero. I applaud his courage at purging the foil from his body. We could all learn a lesson from him. #overcompensate

Be careful what you wish for. The idiots here who think they're smart will opine. Watch...

Actually, the last time that someone claimed there were rational arguments for it (just pedofilin' by), he ducked out without ever saying what the rational arguments were.

Other than a questionable study that measured 'penis circumference' in an obviously staged atmosphere, this is largely bullshit. I haven't seen a lot of evidence at all that people who hate gays are all secretly harboring love for men. It's obviously a bullshit counter argument meant to attack their masculinity, which makes it no different than gay bashing really. You're just like that kid calling someone a 'pillowbiter' because you think they're wimpy.

You know they did a study once about how men's brains react to man on man sex. This is, really, the only kind of homosexuality that really outrages men. They found that there's an interesting brain reaction to the average man when he sees and image of two dudes butt ****ing... aggression.

Even the most liberal and socially progressive folks in the world... if they were not gay the basic response was the same as if they felt threatened by something.

I can't explain why there is a response like that, but it makes more sense than "if you hate something you secretly love that thing!"

That applies to absolutely nothing. At all. We don't claim people who hate black people secretly want to have sex with them. They're just assholes.

I feel sorry for Homos. Some feel the need to tell the world what they're ****ing when no one really cares.

This thread has been on the front page for days.

Obviously folks here care.

A lot.

That's why you clicked on the thread with hundreds of posts, right? To tell us that nobody cares?

There are probably 100 posts on this very thread of people saying the exact same thing as you. "Nobody cares."

That's a lot of not caring for a pretty boring thing that nobody cares about, wouldn't you say?

FYI... you're doing the same thing you're accusing him of. At least he provided links to the study in post #655....

On the surface the answer would probably be yes. However, in my case it's a, "Not really"....My reasoning is simple - if they gay person gets to announce it. I get to say that I don't care. Hopefully with enough," I don't care" responses in the real world, there will eventually be no need to announce anything. Same with responding to a thread like this.

Just do it - don't announce it. Just my opinion.

That's the same study I"m talking about. I know that this silly study, which was designed around reaching a specific conclusion, exists. Now let's apply common sense... does anything ELSE increase bloodflow that could make your cock expand a bit? There are a multitude of things that can cause it aside from sexual arousal... you know things like nervousness, stress, anger, and even fear. Ya think MAYBE these things could impact a study that is targeting people who are nervous, stressed, angry and fearful of gay people? Measuring penis circumference is not a good way to tell if someone is aroused, and a slight increase is NOT a boner. It's not scientific. It's dick measuring. Just stop and IMAGINE this thing taking place.

It's a bullshit study designed to justify a bullshit argument. However since it reaches the desired conclusion (which is to, again, emasculate people by calling them gay... which seems counter to the whole 'supportive of gay people' position) it's often cited and is plastered all over the ****ing internet.

I'm looking for the study I'm talking about, but I did find the study which imaged people's brains under similar circumstances (also with various control groups) to be far more reliable than a dick measuring session. If I can't find it... believe what you want. I view you as a pretty empirically minded guy, so honestly I'm surprised you'd buy into such a silly agenda driven study.

Look, I'm fully supportive of gay folks. Get married, adopt babies (a lot of kids need homes you assholes and a gay couple is better than 'the system' that created charlie Manson)... I'm all for it. If you want to get to the root of why people hate gays, the best place to start is by being honest about it. They're not harboring secret man lust. They're assholes.

I'm not going to say that gay bashers are secretly gay, but you do have to wonder about what it is about homosexuality that elicits such a hateful reaction.

To clarify, I'm speaking specifically of gay bashers that aren't religious and/or have never had a negative encounter with a homosexual (like being molested by a gay uncle or being close to someone growing up that was molested by a gay, etc.)

That's the simple part.

People are assholes and they are prejudiced against people who are different. Some people are bigger asshole and their prejudices develop into full blown bigotry.

I'm not really sure there's some magic answer here. Some people are just assholes who are always looking for someone to be an asshole to.

There's plenty of other studies that support the notion of some homophobic behavior being linked to denial or unacknowledged homosexual desires.

Take a look at these:

http://www.livescience.com/19563-hom...mosexuals.html

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...-+ScienceDaily)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8772014

http://her.oxfordjournals.org/content/15/1/97.full

A lot of people rubberneck at accident scenes, too.

I bet you're like Vizzini from Princess Bride IRL. You just give off the smug vibe of a mildly intelligent little man.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/U_eZmEiyTo0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

That's the thing, though. If that were the case and it were so cut and dry, they'd all hate anyone that wasn't like them- not just gays. And honestly, it seems to have a much stronger focus on gay males (and masculine lesbians) than their female counterparts.

Why care? Why do they care so much?

I'm sure there's no blanket statement that could be true for all of them but it makes me wonder..

A lot of people slow down at accident scenes.

You and others are parking your cars on the side of the road and actively walking up to the scene of the accident. And not to help, either.

Firstly I'm not saying it's a non occurrence, I'm saying it's not the norm. I also find the supporting studies to be flimsy. However I'll read these and give you my immediate reaction, given I literally am bored out of my ****ing mind right now.

Link #1 is basically a word association game where conclusions were reached based on the reaction time. There is nothing that could be reached conclusively by these methods. Again, the whole thing seems DESIGNED around reaching a certain conclusion. I suppose one could call that a prediction, but the means to achieve it is hardly convincing to me.

Okay, so I'll move on to link #2. ... That's the same study as link 1. Two papers about the same study are not multiple examples man. You're better than that. I'm not reading all of that.

Okay I'll move on to link #3 This is the penis measuring study! Do you find any reason, after the facts I provided about how your penis responds to various emotions, to still think this is a valid study? They could not control the variables. It's flawed.

Okay, how about link #4 This is about self loathing homosexuals and how it impacts their health in a negative way. It's not about closet homosexuals venting rage on gay people. Interesting read, but not even on topic.

You didn't expect me to actually read those links did you? You're better than this man. While I can't convince you of what I read (I wish I could find that ****in' link) I insist it's methods were far superior to these two studies.

I've posted in this thread six times. You're currently sitting at 30.

Donger is at 134, almost one hundred posts greater than Baby Lee in second place with 39.

Rubbernecking, indeed.

On the contrary. I'm absolutely trying to help.

I'm not sure what implication you are trying to make, but okay.

I wonder how many people circle around dozens of times to rubberneck at the same accident. ;)

Well, it's easy to target them.

The weird thing is that if homosexuality were strictly a female thing, nobody would care at all. I really believe that. There's something about man on man action that gets guys blood hot. I've seen studies that support it, but as Fish has pointed out I cannot provide any evidence of it (yet, I'm still looking for it).

Now THIS guy really cares. He did math and stuff.

What about straight couples who have no desire to procreate or those that know before they get married that they cannot procreate? In your scenario, they shouldn't be allowed to marry either and enjoy the "special benefits" of marriage.

I guess individuals that feel this way should be pushing for legislation to have all children raised by single parents put up for adoption by traditional families.

You do love to troll and lie. I can't imagine why Frazod thought you were a worthless piece of shit.