Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > General Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 22-07-2017, 05:03 PM   #501
derekbuttery
Senior Member
 
derekbuttery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Masonic, Canada
Posts: 5,383
Likes: 1,794 (1,141 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thermion View Post
A: It's not compulsory (although putting a man's prostate where it is...)

B: Many straight couples do this. So as a world aggregate, many more man-on-woman occurrences than man-on-man.
__________________
PEDOPHOBE AND PROUD
derekbuttery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-07-2017, 09:46 PM   #502
greatdayforfreedom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,653
Likes: 590 (282 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cafe beelzebub View Post
Not sure sticking your cock up a mans arse is an illusion. But what other people choose to do with their body parts is none of my concern.
What about men sticking their cock up a woman's arse? Anal sex isn't just exclusively gay men. Anyway, it's just holographic bodies having illusory sex.
__________________
''I started a journey 25 years ago and I'm bloody well gonna finish it. And it will only end when I do'' - David Icke.
greatdayforfreedom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-07-2017, 10:45 PM   #503
mranderson
Senior Member
 
mranderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,898
Likes: 1,976 (993 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by greatdayforfreedom View Post
Anyway, it's just holographic bodies having illusory sex.
there are consequences to the illusion

you could catch illusory herpes which isn't a very nice hologram to have to explain to someone for the first time

or you could create another hologram that looks up to you for answers

and I would be careful about teaching the new hologram that it's all an illusion

they might come back at you with that one in some incredible ways

'' tidy my room ? what mess ? it's just an illusion ''

'' bad grades ? what grades ? it's just an illusion ''

'' what job ? a job ? what's the point ? it's just an illusion remember Dad ? ''

'' no Dad , you can kiss my holographic ass I am not taking part in your illusion any more ''
__________________
peter piper picked a pod of pickled pepper
mranderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-07-2017, 11:12 PM   #504
greatdayforfreedom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,653
Likes: 590 (282 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mranderson View Post
there are consequences to the illusion

you could catch illusory herpes which isn't a very nice hologram to have to explain to someone for the first time

or you could create another hologram that looks up to you for answers

and I would be careful about teaching the new hologram that it's all an illusion

they might come back at you with that one in some incredible ways

'' tidy my room ? what mess ? it's just an illusion ''

'' bad grades ? what grades ? it's just an illusion ''

'' what job ? a job ? what's the point ? it's just an illusion remember Dad ? ''

'' no Dad , you can kiss my holographic ass I am not taking part in your illusion any more ''
Just because it's an Illusion, it doesn't mean you can't have a nice illusory tidy room, etc.
__________________
''I started a journey 25 years ago and I'm bloody well gonna finish it. And it will only end when I do'' - David Icke.
Likes: (1)
greatdayforfreedom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-07-2017, 12:57 PM   #505
cafe beelzebub
Senior Member
 
cafe beelzebub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 260 (122 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thermion View Post
A: It's not compulsory (although putting a man's prostate where it is...)

B: Many straight couples do this. So as a world aggregate, many more man-on-woman occurrences than man-on-man.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greatdayforfreedom View Post
What about men sticking their cock up a woman's arse? Anal sex isn't just exclusively gay men. Anyway, it's just holographic bodies having illusory sex.
Why are people pointing out the blindingly obvious? I don't give a fuck about straight people doing that either.
cafe beelzebub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-07-2017, 02:07 PM   #506
ooberman
Senior Member
 
ooberman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: London
Posts: 4,205
Likes: 2,488 (1,165 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thermion View Post
A: It's not compulsory (although putting a man's prostate where it is...)

B: Many straight couples do this. So as a world aggregate, many more man-on-woman occurrences than man-on-man.
The human arse hole doesn't 'self lubricate' to accommodate a cock. The female vagina does self lubricate - if not, then your not doing it right.

__________________
Atrocity propaganda is a term referring to the spreading of deliberate fabrications or exaggerations about the crimes committed by an enemy, constituting a form of psychological warfare - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atrocity_propaganda
ooberman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-07-2017, 11:30 PM   #507
dr0n3
Senior Member
 
dr0n3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 648
Likes: 6 (6 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mranderson View Post
But you are suggesting it by suggesting that because someone is a hetero they should automatically want to fuck their sister , that's insanity speaking

If what you are suggesting is true then I would literally want to mate with every single woman I encounter. My mother my aunt my cousins , what I want to ask you is .... why does it seem that every discussion about sexual behaviour must include some reference to incest or sex with children.

What the hell are you trying to achieve here ? I think these discussions are more a reflection of what's going on in your own mind that what is going on in the genes and minds of the world at large. You are suggesting that all hetero males would automatically decide to fuck their family simply because they are the opposite sex. This is an insane statement !!


What the hell are you on about ? It is hardly a piss poor argument to suggest that A: there are many forms of love that transcend sexual gratification and that B: it's a well documented fact that inbreeding will cause genetic abnormalities.

I love my father does it make me gay ? No. Does it mean I want to have sex with him ? No but I still love him with all my heart.

Same goes for lots of my friends. I have a life long friend who is a male I would say that I love the guy and care deeply about him but does it mean I ever had the intention of fucking him ? No and to suggest that love must all ways include sexual gratification is exactly the kind of disturbed mindset we see coming from pedos trying to normalise their sick desires.

What you are talking about has nothing to do with genetics it's all to do with bizarre sexual scenarios as though that is all gay people are capable of.

There are so many genuinely born gay people who are in no way perverted or want bizarre sexual gratifications.

Just because you haven't found the source of homosexuality it doesn't mean people aren't born gay. I can assure you they are I have two family members a male and a female who are both gay and the both knew they were gay from a very early age.

Neither of them would suggest that means they deserved to be sexually coached by an adult on how to be gay.

Neither does it mean they ever tried to act out their sexuality with family members.

I would suggest you are attempting to use a negative to prove a positive over and over again with this '' you would auto fuck your sister because you are hetero'' thing.

it's a ridiculous statement based on nothing but your own strange interpretation of what love is and what it means to be straight
You're confused. The more I read you, the more I'm inclined to believe many of your thoughts are contradictory and shockingly incoherent.

Your whole argument is grounded in the fallacious idea that heterosexuals are genetically predisposed to be attracted to women, as opposed to it being socially constructed.

Needless to say, there is plenty of evidence that suggests otherwise, that the psycho-social development towards heterosexuality has been clearly defined and understood by developmental psychologists as a cultural and environmental phenomenon.

But let's not dabble into that, for the sake of simplicity.

Essentially your argument boils down to the idea that genetics endowed humans with a preset sexuality, which would certainly imply that whatever prevailing sexual orientation we have, is unalterable.

So far so good.

Now, let me get this clear once and for all.

The fact that you haven't developed an emotional and sexual attraction towards your sister, argues for my point that attraction towards women is not genetic but rather socially constructed.

The fact that you aren't mating with every single woman you encounter, again argues for my point that attraction towards women is not genetic but rather socially constructed.

The fact that heterosexuals can transition to homosexuality or say, object-sexuality, argues for my point that sexuality is highly malleable and contrary to the idea of it being deep-rooted, and thus genetic.

The fact that researchers haven't found ''homosexual'' or ''heterosexual'' sequences of genes on the human genome, argues for my point that sexuality is not genetically-based.

You still haven't provided a single shred of evidence for your claim regarding the genetic component of sexuality other than mere opinion, with this gish gallop word salad that covers the same things you've been endlessly yapping about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ronisron View Post
I think homosexuality occurs naturally and genetically. True gay males take on a very effeminate countenance, as do true gay females -- fey and butch if you will. IT's obvious in that regard that it is a naturally occurring thing. Some males are born with more estrogen, females with more testosterone - these things take shape in utero.
Surprisingly, that's not the case at all.

Multiple studies have already refuted the theory of prenatal ex­posure to excess hormones as a cause of homosexuality. If anything, hormones simply eroticises whatever prevailing psychological sexual orientation is already there.That is, it either increases or lowers sex drive. You just become more (or less) sexually active, not more (or less) homosexual.

No wonder hormonal treatment had no effect on Alan Turing.
__________________
Atheism
The belief there was once absolutely nothing. And nothing happened to the nothing until the nothing magically exploded (for no reason), creating everything and everywhere. Then a bunch of the exploded everything magically rearranged itself (for no reason whatsoever), into self-replicating bits which eventually turned into dinosaurs.

And they mock your beliefs.
dr0n3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2017, 12:16 AM   #508
mranderson
Senior Member
 
mranderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,898
Likes: 1,976 (993 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr0n3 View Post
You're confused.
No I'm not , I'm a married father of two children and I'm perfectly content with that. I'm not at all the one who is confused about what my body is or what it is used for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr0n3 View Post
The more I read you, the more I'm inclined to believe many of your thoughts are contradictory and shockingly incoherent.
Your whole University course is a lesson in incoherent contradictions. Congratulations on wasting your life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr0n3 View Post
Your whole argument is grounded in the fallacious idea that heterosexuals are genetically predisposed to be attracted to women, as opposed to it being socially constructed.
No it isn't , my whole argument is grounded in the fact that men have a penis which ejaculates sperm and females have a reproductive system that produces eggs and womens bodies create the miracle of life. Those things are objective facts. All you have is subjective theory. I am suggesting that when your genetics dictate that you have a penis and testicles , those genes are trying to tell you that your preferred partner is a female with a vagina a womb and ovaries. That's the biological reality that genetics does dictate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr0n3 View Post
Needless to say, there is plenty of evidence that suggests otherwise, that the psycho-social development towards heterosexuality has been clearly defined and understood by developmental psychologists as a cultural and environmental phenomenon.
Needless to say plenty of evidence suggests otherwise? Where ? What evidence is there that humans have evolved to be anything but genetically heterosexual ? I don't need a psychologist to tell me how the human reproductive system works. I need a biologist.

But here you go again with all your critical theory crap about heterosexuality being a social construct. I would turn the tables entirely around and suggest that homosexuality is a social construct born of many factors including lack of a loving father , sexual abuse as a child, human inability to deal with lust , power over not power from within and the influx of twisted morals pushed by people taking stupid university courses thinking they are paving the way for a brave new world when really your chances of finding a job after you leave with this nonsense is pretty slim unless you move to California and then you will most likely be employed by some bat shit crazy lesbian hell bent on normalising peadophilia and incest.

You are basing your entire career on suggesting that biology will have to concede reality to psychology. More fool you.

If you are so bloody clever why didn't you take a course in something useful such as Marine Biology or Molecular Engineering.

Oh I know why , because the Critical Theory neo marxist courses on offer at Universities don't require any actual talent in anything they just require that you never , ever deviate from the subjective biased of Critical Theory.

Hows that for some Critical Theory.
__________________
peter piper picked a pod of pickled pepper
mranderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2017, 12:27 AM   #509
mranderson
Senior Member
 
mranderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,898
Likes: 1,976 (993 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr0n3 View Post
You're confused. The more I read you, the more I'm inclined to believe many of your thoughts are contradictory and shockingly incoherent.

Your whole argument is grounded in the fallacious idea that heterosexuals are genetically predisposed to be attracted to women, as opposed to it being socially constructed.

.
This is one of your other forum threads.
https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=317882

Your whole University course is designed to push the idea that sexuality is a social construct , that sexuality along with everything else must be subject to de construction using Critical Theory and your sick bunch of pseudo scientist psychologists will be used to normalise peadophilia

Hows that for a home run ?
__________________
peter piper picked a pod of pickled pepper
mranderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:38 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.