thelesbianlifestyle.com

I found that to be a wake up call. We are always saying that things are changing and as far as I’m concerned, it’s not really changing. It’s just more taboo for them to bash us in public but I know it’s still going on in churches and in homes. You have to wonder what your own family might be saying about you when you walk out of the door.

There’s a whole lot wrong with that. The number one thing being you’re equating apples and oranges. Sexual deviates are not discriminated against because of some learned prejudice. The reason they are not accepted is because heterosexuals, all to some degree, see the actual physical things homosexuals do with revulsion. As a heterosexual, I promise you that if I imagine myself involved in a homosexual tryst too vividly, I become nauseated. It’s not bigotry or senseless hatred you’re struggling against, it’s nausea. And no one wants to be nauseated. People naturally avoid sources of nausea. When people inescapably have sources of nausea shoved in their faces, they naturally rebel in some way. You mistakenly refer to this rebellion as “anti-gay” violence. You’re way wrong with that.

Where the problems come is when people are openly confronted with sources of nausea. A few decades back, when you all were in the “closet”, anti-homosexual violence was more rare. That is because there were fewer sources of nausea. If you’ll dress and act like the mainstream population out in public and keep what you do in your bedroom, you’ll have much fewer problems. If you go out in public rubbing it in people’s faces, fairly soon you’ll get the shit knocked out of you by someone you’re making genuinely physically sick. Simple as that. It’s a damn shame you can’t understand that and waste so much of your resources and time laboring for the impossible under a futile delusion. Just drop all this rights thing and enjoy your lives in private. Damn, don’t you know what a pogrom is? No sense trying to get yourselves nominated as number one candidate for the next one that comes along. Read a little relevant history, keep your heads low, and survive.

Denise… it’s hate like you have displayed in your comment that has this country falling apart. But the greatest thing about a comment like yours is that it reminds people like me to keep my head held higher, challenge history, and live a far greater life than just simply surviving.

Goldstar, I don’t hate you or anyone else. I honestly wish you and all your kind the best. But you should agree nature dictates you’ll always be in a minority. Period. The essay I responded to pointed out the correlation between heightened homosexual activism and increased violence toward that group. I promise you I haven’t contributed to the numbers. Homosexuality is an unfortunate genetic condition to which normal people are hard wired to respond with revulsion despite what drums the freaks in Hollywood beat. You’re not going to change human nature. The more hell you raise, the more harm you’re going to bring your kind. Just look at results of recent ballot proposals. Quit while you’re ahead and be happy before you bring genuine grievances upon yourselves.

Denise, I won’t go back and forth on the issues. I see things my way and you yours. I wish the world could find a happy medium, but I fear it my never happen. If homosexuals make you want to vomit please move on to another blog.

Denise, I really hope you are a teenager, like myself.

I can tolerate fellow teenagers saying things like that.. because sadly, many 16 year olds are close minded and ignorant of many things.

However I find it truly disappointing and honestly it makes me quite sad to hear adults speak like that. It is disrespectful and unbelievably ignorant. It’s quite obvious that this is a website geared towards homosexuals.. so if your views are blatantly against homosexuality, what exactly do you hope to gain from saying such things? I highly doubt any of the authors or writers here (or many other people, for that matter) would agree with your opinion that all heterosexuals “become nauseated” by gays and lesbians.

“The reason they are not accepted is because heterosexuals, all to some degree, see the actual physical things homosexuals do with revulsion.” This is a direct quote from what you said, and it is extremely false. You, personally, might become nauseated by “the actual physical things homosexuals do” and that is perfectly fine, however I can guarantee you that not ALL heterosexuals feel this way, mainly because I have many heterosexual friends that are perfectly ok with homosexuality. No one is forcing you to be accepting of certain views, as it is obviously not possible.

However, if you wish to call yourself a respectable adult, I would have hoped that you would have enough maturity to be capable of respecting other people’s views, opinions, and beliefs. Do you see me verbally abusing you and telling you that what you do with individuals you are attracted to disgusts me? Do I tell you that you are nauseating? No. So please, especially around the holidays, do us all a favor and pull together enough maturity to grow up.

Em´s last blog post..aaah!

Dear Em and Goldstar,

I’ll take one last shot at explaining myself. My response wasn’t directed at you two. Probably nothing can be said which could change the minds of such firebrand activists. But not all homosexual females march, riot, curse for the TV cameras, and show the uglier side of themselves to the public in the name of overreaching “rights”. Once again I was pointing out the relation between increased lesbian activism and violence against lesbians.

This violence doesn’t single out the activists who are stirring the pot of disgust. The victims of the backlash are generally just everyday innocent females, some lesbians, some like myself who are not, who have the misfortune to encounter those you’ve enraged. These are the women I am trying to persuade to take a second look at your organized activism and the single thing it’s undeniably accomplishing for us; increased incidences of assault. I am simply asking readers to consider facts and reconsider supporting these futile and dangerous activist movements.

One fact is throughout the animal kingdom aggression and competition defines male sexual behavior. It is a deadly serious area of natural behavior. The sexual identity of heterosexual males is ultimately the most important aspect of their existence. Threatening or compromising this identity is the single cause of violence against lesbians by male heterosexuals.

All women should realize this fact without the physical trauma of experience; having our teeth knocked down our throats or our little female bones snapped like twigs by enraging the much superior physical power of the human heterosexual male who, by God’s design, will continue to dominate our species. It’s just common sense. Dress and act like a normal female in public and you’ll greatly increase the chances you’ll be treated like one

Hahahahahahahaha an activist? Honey I’m a 16 year old in high school. I can assure you I wear make up and I dress like a “normal” female, tight jeans, chucks, fitted tops from AE and abercombie… I’m not an enraged dangerous lesbian activist and I find it hysterical that you refer to me as such.

So… Denise I think you should just stop. Really. I dress like a normal female in public, and I get treated like one too. I promise. It’s just people like you that make a big stink over things.

Oh, and I’m pretty sure heterosexual males everywhere are cringing over the fact that you made them all sound extremely shallow by saying “The sexual identity of heterosexual males is ultimately the most important aspect of their existence.”

dancer_inbarefeet´s last blog post..2:08 AM

“Women who love women are Lesbians. Men, because they can only think of women in sexual terms, define Lesbian as sex between women.”
— Rita Mae Brown

Oh my God, oh my God, oh my God, Oh my God.
I’m nauseated by the comments made by Denise. I am in awe, sitting here at my computer. #1, what is your agenda on a lesbian site posting such hate? ANd I’m sorry, but claim as much as you want that it’s not hate, but nothing will ever convince me of that. What is it that draws you to this site? What is it in you that makes you think speaking this way is ok? That is does anything positive for yourself, or us, or the universe, or “your cause”? Why do you seek out those things you don’t agree with, people that you only have ill thoughts and feelings towards, and bash them? That is my only question.
Who told you it was a good idea to put your head down and keep quiet? If that were the answer, more than half the people in this country would have their heads down. And I don’t mean half are lesbians. Black people would still be slaves. They wouldn’t vote, or marry, or have been desegregated. Women would still be quietly coasting through opressed existences and marriages and be barefoot and pregnant, uneducated, unemployed, and silenced in all areas of their lives. This country would be all white instead of the wonderful and culturally-diverse union it is. Obama, Hillary…we would have never seen their faces on TV. Is that the answer for you in your life? Fear the man and take what’s coming to you, or worse, just take what you can get? Do you have no fight in you, no drive, no pride? I am not trying to get catty with you at all, I will not resort to name calling or insults, though the “animal” in me would love to settle this the good ole fashioned “animal kingdom” way you speak of. And do you know why I’d win that fight, Denise? Because you are afraid of what you don’t know. Can you win, should you try? Are they going to hurt you, cast you out? You don’t know. Instead of fighting for yourself, you let others decide what will happen to you. You put your head down and act like they want you to, not as you really feel in your heart. (If you’re about to rebut by saying you are acting on what’s in your heart by making these arguments, don’t even try it. It is not out of love that you speak these words.)
I don’t need to run the streets screaming that I’m in love with a female for the ooh’s and aah’s. But I certainly will never deny it, not for you, not for me, and not for those wishing that I, we ALL, would just sit down and shut up. They wished that with African Americans, and women, and countless other “minority” groups, but they didn’t do anything of the sort. And thank God (yes, my GOd is the same God as yours) they didn’t. Think of where we, and that includes you, would be.
My only hope for you is love and acceptance, and to actually understand what those words mean. I wish for you compassion and peace in your heart. When you find it, you’ll look back and see the error of your ways. You’ll see the life you were living and you’ll be so glad to finally understand what it is to love and be loved.
Positive karma.

An obviously well thought out and well written post. Thank you for sharing it with us.

Lori Madison´s last blog post..Something Beautiful

To the open minded and reasonable women who’ve read this exchange:

The rebuttals made here to my expounding on the correlation between increased lesbian activism and increased incidence of violence against women has been simply that I’m an “ignorant hater”. To reasonable people, that is not a rebuttal, but an irrelevant, irrational, and desperate response to inconvenient fact.

Comparing the current lesbian “struggle” to past suffrage movements is again, apples and oranges. Among mammals in nature the protection of females is paramount. Healthy numbers of females are necessary for maintaining species population viability whereas the number of males is of more secondary importance. This natural fact gave rise to chivalry and the respect and deference males have traditionally shown females in western civilization. But this is changing as our population numbers explode. The hateful fact is that if every lesbian disappeared tomorrow, viability of the human race would not be damaged a whit. This is not the stone age. The need for the pedestal on which women have been placed by nature is disappearing. I personally fear obnoxious lesbian activism is accelerating it’s disappearance.

This hell raising “struggle” being waged by your leaders can go one of two ways. One of course is that you win over public opinion and attain some goals. The other is more ominous. The human race could collectively realize the fact you’re no longer needed. A few pronouncements by key mullahs and preachers could literally toast you. This is the crossroads at which you stand. The key scratching of cars in church parking lots and blacks being called niggers by opponents of prop 8 in the aftermath of the election is definitely changing public opinion.

Just look at your leadership’s responses above and their inability to not only carry on an intellectual conversation, but even to recognize an issue when it’s stated. They probably see “hate” as the underlying reason they have to pay their utility bills. You’re not following scientists. Be careful. Now how hateful is that?

These things are not apples and oranges, and by declaring they are, you are saying one group was better and more important than the other. Not true.

NO ONE should ever stop fighting for what they believe. How can you, in your right mind, defend these men who assault women? You defend them by saying that it’s OUR fault becasue we are declaring we don’t want a man’s penis and it’s OUR fault for not telling these self-centered, mysoginystic men that we need them to have sex with us and dominate us and make us happy. It is because we don’t feel these things that we do not say them. We must be true to ourselves. We will not lie to anyone to ensure that we, or other women, will not be victimized. It is not because we don’t care about ourselves or other women, but because we care about ourselves too much to let others tell us what to be, or to hold us down. Self respect and pride and honor are not only for men, not now, not anymore.
Lesbians have children. Lesbians contribute to the continuation of the human race. We may not lay in bed with a man to do it, but it still happens the same “scientific” way. We still do it the same way as everyone else. We use the same biological and medical and scientific ways as you. We are not obsolete, we do matter, and we won’t be “toasted” (whatever that means).
You contradict yourself when you first make the argument that women are here and protected for men for procreation’s sake, and then saying that that pedestal is being diminished. Which is it? Do you really see yourself as a being put here to pump babies out, or are you a human being that is worth much more than just that? Are men really chivalrous? Do they not show chivalry just to get what they want some of the time? Trust me, I’m not a man-hating lesbian; in fact, I’m not a lesbian at all. I am a bisexual that has had some wonderful men in my life, as well as some not so wonderful. Bottom line is that comparing us and pointing us back to the days of cavemen fighting for their women as property and so that they could reproduce is irrelevant. Things are not like that anymore.
The human race will never decide “we are not needed” bacause the human race doesn’t think the way we did at the beginning of time. No one is fighting gay rights thinking “it’s because they don’t reproduce that we hate them”. It is sheer fear and the fact that they don’t understand or accept those who are different than them or have different beliefs. It is the reason religious wars are waged, women are still killed in other countries for not obeying rules, and hate crimes occur.
Your argument will never win over “love thy neighbor as thyself” or “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. Love and the spreading of love will win everytime.
I don’t need to be careful. Those that may hurt me are at fault, not me. You must be one of those women who agree with lawyers in the defense of rapists who say the victim’s outfit meant she was “asking for it” even though she said no…

Hi, Denise! I was the author of this article. I would have responded earlier but I’ve been on vacation.

I’ve read only a little bit of your posts, to be honest. I value your opinion but I also value my right to read only so much bullshit. In the words of the immortal George Carlin, “it’s bad for ya!”

Please understand that I hold you in the highest respect, but let me speak my mind. Until you have gone through the shit that gay people (man, woman, genderqueer, transgendered) go through on a daily basis, until you have been discriminated against, abused, beaten, denied your basic human rights, etc etc, your comments have no place or purpose here. But thank you for thinking that they did. It was cute.

Chelsea´s last blog post..Sex

Chelsea,
Thanks for the appreciation. If you ever author an article on whining, please email me and let me know. I enjoy reading articles on whose subjects the author is expert.

Awww, it’s cute when you try, Denise, it really is.

Chelsea´s last blog post..Sex

Also, I’d like to add something.

Would you give the same “keep your head down and shut up already” advice to African Americans during the Civil Rights movement? Or would you tell the handicapped person in his wheelchair to move his bulk out of your precious way on the sidewalk? Would you look at a woman during the Women’s Rights movement in the early 1900s and tell her to shut her mouth and return to the kitchen? Obviously you can look at a gay person and tell them that their marriage is just not as important as yours, so I would really like to know. Also, if you don’t think that gay rights are the same as any other civil rights, I’d like to hear an argument as to why that is, with cited sites from peer-reviewed journals published by credible sources.

You must understand something, Neciepoo. This is not just a throw-away issue that you can stomp under your feet because you’re tired of hearing about it. These are OUR LIVES. These are our loved ones and our rights and we WILL NOT stop fighting until we are just as equal as you. No man is equal until all men are equal. For you to denounce our fight as something petty and tedious means that you are just another bigot with their head shoved so far up their ass that they can’t even smell their own bullshit.

I’m sorry to the moderators–I hate to feed Neciepoo the Troll here, but I feel I must speak my mind. Denise, for goodness’ sakes, have some goddamn compassion for your fucking fellow man. Jesus.

Chelsea´s last blog post..Sex

Thank you, Chelsea. I started to think I was the only one appalled by Denise and her views. Well written, my sentiments exactly.

Dear Chelsea,

You hit upon another issue which is generating disgust for your people in your last name-calling tirade. That being the issue of marriage. The reason there exist so much resistance for your agenda in this area is you have no business being involved in it. Marriage is strictly a heterosexual institution which exists to support and promote sapiency wherein the children produced are taught and trained their proper roles in the society of which they will become part. Again it’s apples and oranges. Marriage among homosexuals is superfluous because the marriage template simply doesn’t fit these relationships. It is the same as if I were to begin meddling in the social institutions of honeybees. I would likely encounter resistance, as you have, and soon find myself stung, as you likely will.

I do however, empathize with your feeling a legitimate need to formalize and legally recognize relationships in some manner similar to marriage. But creation of such an institution should be formed from whole cloth and designed to accommodate the needs of homosexuals and other eccentrics.

Such a contractual agreement should have it’s own name so as not to confuse it with holy matrimony. For brevity’s sake we can invent one here. How about “Thumbah”? The parameters for Thumbah should be necessarily broad in terms and scope. A person could enter Thumbah with one or multiple same sex partners, an animal or multiple animals, trees or inanimate objects, or even breezy ideas. Commitments made could be any which are legally permissible, that is no commitments could be made in solemn Thumbah forming a conspiracy to violate the law. Rites consummating Thumbahs could be anything you wish from double ring ceremonies, circuses, orgies, you can see now how the skies the limit. Aniversities of Thumbahs could be celebrated anyway you want. Trips abroad to the few countries you’ll soon be allowed, gift exchanging, or group sex would likely be popular Thumbah anniversary celebrations. Chelsea, you have a real need to begin thinking outside the box.

Quote: “If you’re committed to living in a dream world, you might as well be creative” – Denise Stafford

…”thumbah”? I am deeply insulted. I thought that since we’re all human, we all deserve the right to call our relationships marriage. That you insist otherwise suggests to me that you could actually care less about what the real meaning of marriage actually MEANS to some people, which appalls me.

“Thumbah”. For fuck’s sake. I apologize for my language, but that’s just too much ridiculousness to be allowed.

“Marriage among homosexuals is superfluous because the marriage template simply doesn’t fit these relationships. It is the same as if I were to begin meddling in the social institutions of honeybees. I would likely encounter resistance, as you have, and soon find myself stung, as you likely will.”

I pity you. Like no other.

Chelsea´s last blog post..Sex

Chelsea,

If I insulted you by the use of that word “thumbah” I offer you my heartfelt apology. I dreamed up the word as I typed my response. Or at least I thought I dreamed it up. If it has some negative meaning in your lexicon, I’m guilty of nothing but ignorance. I felt offering my suggestion a unique name would lend it dignity as opposed to the rather cold “civil union” alternative used in popular media.

From a practical point of view, such a contractual arrangement should be catholic enough to include all known deviates and potential deviates in the future so our culture would only have to absorb a single shock. I know this may be extreme but when I was dating I knew men I suspicion held abnormal affection for their cars.

Realistically, if the government proceeded to establish such broad based accommodation as I’ve suggested a word should be derived from Latin or borrowed from french as english has done so often. I googled thumbah after your response but didn’t learn anything.

I also googled the word “Neciepoo” and learned nothing. Did you coin that word or does it occur elsewhere? If it is part of our language where does it come from and what does it mean? regards

Denise,

I think there’s a disconnect here. I come from a family who feels the same as you, but somewhat more militantly, so I understand where you’re coming from. And I consider myself a fairly reasonable human being, so bear with me here.

As much as I disagree with you and will continue to fight against the blatant discrimination faced by minorities, what truly concerns me is how you define me and my relationships as less than human. I assure you, I was born in the conventional way, was conceived by two humans, and popped on out nine months later to be raised by humans. So when you say there should be a a separate contract for not only homosexuals, polygamists and people who seek relationships with various flora and fauna, I’m more than just a little upset or insulted.

Let’s start this off with the two “c” words – consent and commitment. I’ll tackle consent first.

Maybe you work in an animal linguistic laboratory with leading research in cross-species communication. You may be an expert here, I don’t know. But if I go up to my friend’s cat and say, “Fluffy, I love you. Let’s be together forever and get married,” Fluffy is going stare at me for a minute and then go attack the cricket squeaking behind the couch. If I have a potted plant that I’ve taken care of for years, and I ask the plant to elope, the plant may wave in the breeze, but not of its own will.

Animals and plants don’t have a language. Sure, there is some form of affection and communication with pets, and some people like to sing to their gardens. But marriages, civil unions and the like happen (at least here in America, unfortunately not everywhere) between two consenting adults who can with sound mind say, “Yes, I do want to be married to you.” If you’re getting extra friendly with the maple in your yard or your neighbor’s shiatsu, that’s rape. And rape is not ok.

Now commitment is an entirely different situation. In truth, commitment in marriage is almost a moot point today considering the frequency of divorce, but for argument’s sake we’ll pretend that it’s still relevant. Now, marriages that take place in a church with a spiritual leader ask those seeking to marry to commit themselves to each other AND their selected deity, but non-religious ceremonies ask only for commitment to each other. If two consenting human adults wish to share their lives, their love, and everything that comes with it, including their rights and finances, in a committed relationship, I’m not really sure what you think is so superfluous about it.

Now, you contend that marriage should be defined by the ability of those within the marriage to procreate. So I pose a couple of questions to you – If two people who meet in a nursing home or 55+ community fall in love and the woman is post menopausal, should they not be allowed to marry? I mean, they can’t have kids. Obviously this relationship is superfluous. Just like the infertile 35 year old man and his fiancee, they’ll never be able to have children together. Therefore, they don’t fit the normal, baby-poppin’ template of a family. Their relationship is surely inferior to the high school drop outs at the county clerk’s office trying to get married before the woman starts showing and her father raises all hell. And surely the two missionaries who decide to foster and adopt children in need instead of having their own children do not deserve to have their relationship legitimized by the state with a term that could be shared with regular, box fittin’ template-test passin’ folks. Same for the woman with cancer who had a hysterectomy. She doesn’t deserve a marriage because she cannot forward the species.

Your argument against gay marriage is just one slippery slope after another into a pool of fallacies. Now, I can agree with you if you think that marriages should be a religious ceremony only, but only if you’ll agree with me that in order for such a committed relationship to be recognized by law they’ll need it formalized with a state-sanctioned civil union. In the same vein, if you don’t care about religion, then there should be nothing wrong with a civil union in order to secure all the rights and responsibilities ensured by the law to two committed adults. Otherwise, you’re running in a very small circle.

For someone asking the author to think outside the box, you’re putting an awful lot of people inside a box, and it feels an awful lot like an internment camp. If you have some legitimate responses, I’d like to hear them, but be prepared to have holes poked in it. You are the swiss cheese in my deli of human rights and understanding, Neciepoo.

(by the way, that was a nickname you were given. Denise, nise, neciepoo, play on sounds. but if you had to google that, I’m not sure you’ll fare too well on the above areguments. but hell, let’s see what happens.)

Ginger, I read your response three times getting the gist of it. It’s bulletproof as far as all the points you’ve made. I can offer no arguments against any of them. But on the third reading I realized how carefully you had cherry picked the broader canvas to slide around the basic issue. I don’t believe the question is as complex as your almost thousand word essay would leave us to believe. Lets back away from that scene a bit and start with some basics.

Marriage has existed as far back as history reaches.
(1)I can find no examples of cultures until very late where marriage has ever been defined as any union other than one in which potential exists for procreation between the parties involved. (now this seems to be the lynchpin, the procreation thing) Examples of polygamous cultures abound but still the potential for procreation is always present. (2)Procreation is not possible without opposite sex unions. No exception to this rule. Anywhere. Ever. Period.
(3)Marriage today is an entirely inclusive institution. All unmarried of age are qualified to be married. No one is left out or excluded! You! me! everyone! This is all so very simple so we should be on the same page with no disagreements.

Now we have a solid unassailable definition of what marriage is. You are either married or you aren’t and you can either get married or not get married. Purely voluntary, no one is coerced, and no one of age is excluded! If you find yourself in a marriage you don’t wish to continue, you can get out of it! Hooray for marriage! Take it or leave it! What a country! Purely your choice!

I don’t see how anyone could be threatened by the existence of such an institution. It baffles me how someone could read the weddings section of the paper and start frothing at the mouth. I don’t see the potential for harm of any group by the existence of the institution of marriage. What is wrong with you people?

In law there’s lots of legal arrangements. You have marriage licenses, deeds to property, titles to cars, powers of attorney,…

To analogize, the way I see it is say you have a car of which you’re really proud. Your neighbor owns a home to which they have a deed. You have a title to your car. You feel deeds are more prestigious and respected and you should have one for your car. You and a bunch of other people without lives start waving signs and raising hell in front of the DMV demanding you be issued deeds to your cars. “By god it’s discrimination! your neighbor has a deed and you only have a title. Hell, canoes and motorcycles have titles. Are you equating my car to a damn canoe?! It’s just hate and ignorance and bigotry and bigotry and ignorance and hate. Simple as that. That’s all there is to it. We’re raising hell until we’re recognized properly and issued deeds to our cars! We’ll struggle and fight to the end!
Really amusing

Neciepoo is a nickname for a character named Denise in a book I read once about women supporting women. I have a nasty habit of being catty when my blood runs hot. I’m done, though, as I believe I’ve said my peace and it’s time to move on to more interesting things.

Chelsea´s last blog post..Encouragement

The problem with the definition of marriage is that, in many states still, it IS defined as a union to produce children. In many states it’s actually possible to get a marriage annulment due to infertility of one of the spouses.
“… if one spouse has a permanent physical condition at the time of the ceremony which prevents sexual intercourse, this may void the marriage, make the marriage voidable, or require a divorce decree. The willful refusal by one party to consummate the marriage will not usually be a ground for annulment since this is a question of behaviour rather than capacity and so becomes a matter for divorce.”

So according to many-a-laws, Marriage IS about procreation and raising children. Technically, my wife and I should probably be in a civil union in this situation, as I’ve no interest in having any kids. Thus, no reason to be married. I wouldn’t mind that though it would honestly complicate things.

“It is the same as if I were to begin meddling in the social institutions of honeybees. I would likely encounter resistance, as you have, and soon find myself stung, as you likely will.”
Look up ‘Royal Jelly’. We wouldn’t HAVE any if we weren’t meddling in the social interactions of honeybees. But then, I’m just being facetious, bringing something like that up.

It’s funny that you bring up the animal kingdom and such in reference to homosexuality. Animals have NO inhibitions. They are classically sexual opportunistic. Dolphins are known to have massive orgies, irrelevant of gender, involving touching and groping and one of the only naturally known instances of ‘nasal sex’, via the blowhole. Monkeys are similarly sexually amorphous. As are the great apes, which we are very closely related to.

There are studied cases of male-male dolphin groupings. They grow up together, they hunt for fish together, they interact both socially AND sexually. And then, together, they will find a female dolphin and herd her away from other dolphins, keep her surrounded, and protect her until she is ready to mate. Then they both mate with her, protect her until she births offspring, and then eventually drive the female off and raise the young dolphin themselves.

Look up Black Swans sometime. About 8% of the average black swan population is homosexual. Two male swans will collude together, separate out a female, drive off other females and suitors, wait for her to lay her eggs and then drive her off. It’s actually been proven that these male-male pairings are BETTER at raising offspring, as they can defend more territory and protect more eggs to hatching then a male-female pairing could. This is actually very common in birds, in particular. There is something of an EPIDEMIC of ‘gay penguins’ in zoos. Kind of hilarious, really. They’ll build their own nest and, if they cannot get an egg from another female, they’ll just put a rock in the nest to fulfill their instincts. There is a pair of male penguins who’ve actually hatched and raised a chick, female, in a zoo. There’s a kid’s book written about it now. “And Tango makes three” or something.

It’s not distinct to humans. One of the more USEFUL polygamy groupings is actually an androgamy. That is, two males and one female. This does not negatively effect the population at all, as one female can still only produce so many offspring, and the children have a better chance of surviving to adulthood as there are more resources being produced by the two fathers. This is practiced even to this day in certain snowy mountainous regions where resources are scarce. The two males are often brothers with the same wife, who has equal sexual access to both of them.

Interestingly, the dolphin male-male pairing behavior can also be seen in human males, in the form of ‘wingman’-style seduction techniques. Where two men go out to approach women and the ‘wingman’ enables the first man whilst working to fend off and entertain any friends or etc that could distract the target female from the seductions of the first male.

Honestly, trying to say that male-female relationships are strictly biological is silly. Procreation is, sure, with the rare exception of a few lizards who can become pregnant without male aide. But both sexuality and preference have always been a matter of opportunity.

You don’t see Black Swans wandering around with signs of protest. Or strictly-Christian dolphins, upset at everyone. D’you suppose there is a Dolphin Jesus, who drowned for their sins?

Probably not.

Honestly, this whole Prop 8 nonsense is just silly. I read an article about a woman who was strictly against this sort of thing, was going on 12 hour fasts every day for 40 days, daily prayer meetings, etc. She doesn’t even have kids, she’s just “worried about her grandchildren.” Fascinating. The article mentions that she convinced her mother, who is 84 years old or somesuch, to go out for the first time in her life and vote on a ballot issue.

Her mother is 84 years old. This woman’s grandmother was not allowed to vote at all. Not until 1920.

In 14 years, when her son goes to school, a black girl will hit on her son and he won’t think it’s weird. A century from now, at the age of 14, her grandson will be hit on by another boy in school, and he won’t think it’s weird. Check the television sometime.

I’m not saying you shouldn’t fight. By all means, do. Rather, I am trying to say that today’s outcome is irrelevant. It does not matter what some crusty old bastard says in court right now. It matters what our children believe, and what their children believe. By the time any of this matters, you will be dead.

Coincidentally, black men were allowed to vote earlier, in 1840 or so. So, first president to be: Black or Female? Black. See a trend here? Anyway.

Denise Stafford, I award you 10/10++ on the trolling effort. Well done, lots of vitriol, great show of ignorance, bravo. Would read again! I hope my mention of dolphin blowhole intercourse has made you a bit nauseous.

As for the rest of you, stop feeding the troll what the hell is wrong with you seriously get a clue.

Reply – Quote´s last blog post..Guildford Flames Season 2008-09

To the author of the above response, you cite aberrant behavior of incarcerated birds as support for your argument. “Kind of hilarious, really” to quote you. Pitiful and desperate perhaps, but hilarious only if you’re cruel enough to ridicule the mind of one of nature’s mistakes.

Contrary to your collection of contrived anecdotes, the truth is nature has little tolerance for real homosexuality. Nature is hard wired to view homosexuality with revulsion. As soon as mama birds come to the conclusion they’re nurturing a future homosexual, they sling it out of the nest to the ground where it starves while the ants eat it. The nature documentary narrator bemoans; “why the sow killed and ate her cub is not known”, but the fact is when mama bear realized she was raising a homosexual she ate the dud for it’s protein to enhance chances her next offspring would be right. When our proto-human ancestors realized they were carrying around and feeding what would grow up to be a queer they would abandon it beside the path and continue walking forward to become the human race. Just as when other freaks occurred, they were abandoned back to nature.

Only some time after the human race settled and gained affluence did it allow itself the luxury of maintaining freaks. Homosexuals were dispersed among small populations existing singly and thus often tolerated

Allow me to liken it to the human body. As long as cancerous cells exist singly, the body tends to tolerate them. When they organize and form tumors the body reacts by sending macrophages and other defense mechanisms to kill them. What Chelsea called “increased anti gay violence” in reaction to obnoxious lesbian organization is nothing more than society’s immune system slowly but inexorably beginning to kick in. Society’s immune system will win out as it always does. It is not known the percentage of the human race that is homosexual. But the day after will be known as “The day of the great body count”. Those who heed my advice to keep their heads low will have a chance to survive and do the arithmetic.

Respect and dignity cannot be legislated or ruled in a court. It must be earned. Why don’t you homosexuals strive for your own admired accomplishments as a source of dignity and respect instead of trying to glom onto the institutions of others? Grafting your unfortunate perversions to marriage will gain you nothing but hostility and disgust, thus hastening the eventuality I’ve predicted above.

“There exists no greater gift of love than these warnings I hast bestown upon thee” –Renaye Denise Stafford

@name Denise Stafford –

Right – so you don’t propagate hate, but you are comparing me to a cancerous tumour because I love a woman? you need to seriously get a grip on yourself and consider what you are saying.

By the way, I’ve read all through your posts and I have something for you to consider;

You say that if we keep our heads down and don’t ‘thrust’ our ‘freak’ nature in society’s face then we won’t be subject to violence right? Wrong.

I am a young, very feminine 23 year old woman. My partner is likewise very feminine. We look no different to countless other young women, gay or straight. We very rarely go in for public displays of affection (we’re too scared basically, we don’t live in the states, things are more precarious round these parts) and are very careful about how we present ourselves.

My partner was recently raped. As punishment, because she is (quoting the evil fucker who probably won’t be punished) ‘a filthy dyke’. He came to this conclusion after she refused his sexual advances, and remembering that she lives with a woman, despite not knowing precisely what this living arrangement was.

You see, we followed your advise, and took heed of your warnings, indeed of the warnings growing in society at large, but it did us no good. And you can claim love as your motivating force all you like, but you’re just echoing centuries of intolerance and hate.

Prejudice and phobia are words which refer to the irrational hatred or fear of something you don’t understand.

Just because you cannot understand why one woman loves another, or why one man loves another, why should we have to hide? why should we live in fear? And most importantly, why would you hate, to the extent of wanting us wiped from your sight, purely because we dare to love?

THE END IS NEAR! All heed the Lesbigeddon and beware! This is fun.

I’m just going to just… move a few things around, down here. For perspective. Capital letters for emphasis and possibly comedy:

[blockquote]What Chelsea called “increased anti BLACK violence” in reaction to obnoxious BLACK organization is nothing more than society’s immune system slowly but inexorably beginning to kick in. Society’s immune system will win out as it always does. It is not known the percentage of the human race that is BLACK. But the day after will be known as “The day of the great body count”. Those who heed my advice to keep their heads low will have a chance to survive and do the arithmetic.

Respect and dignity cannot be legislated or ruled in a court. It must be earned. Why don’t you BLACK PEOPLE strive for your own admired accomplishments as a source of dignity and respect instead of trying to glom onto the institutions of others? Grafting your unfortunate perversions to marriage will gain you nothing but hostility and disgust, thus hastening the eventuality I’ve predicted above.[/blockquote]

Yeah. I was right. It IS funny.

Though let’s be fair. ‘Non-heterosexual activity’ is no longer really much of a minority. Certainly not a majority, but it’s gaining fairly wide acceptance. Find me a black jewish lesbian in a wheelchair, now THERE’S a minority. That whole quote above would have been absolutely hilarious, had I changed it to a black jewish lesbian in a wheelchair. And behold! Society will rise up and strike down the blight on humanity that is black jewish lesbians in wheelchairs! Huzzah!

Denise, I love you. You’re awesome. But, if we’re going to maintain this precious relationship, you’re going to need to cite your sources. See, I am something of a hobbist. I find it interesting to know how the animal kingdom behaves, as an alegory for what to expect in human behavior. And from what I have researched, animals are entirely opportunistic when it comes to sexual activity. The great apes are largely bisexual, as are dolphins. Both mammals, though we are far more related to the great apes then to dolphins. It’s not an ‘aberant behavior’, it’s entirely opportunistic. They do whatever feels good.

So when you say this:
[blockquote]Contrary to your collection of contrived anecdotes, the truth is nature has little tolerance for real homosexuality. Nature is hard wired to view homosexuality with revulsion.[/blockquote]
I really wish you would show some proof. Everything I have researched has led me to believe that animals don’t HAVE a sexuality. There have been numerous studies that have shown animals engage in sexual intercourse for more reasons then just procreation. They’ll do it for recreation, they’ll even do it for favors. There have been case studies of monkeys who will go find a fruit, and bring it to another monkey, and then trade that fruit for sexual favors. Literally, monkey prostitution. Did I get any bile? This is fun.

So if you have any evidence, any proof to the contrary about behavior in animals, I would be very interested to read it. You CAN change my mind; I’m quite different from most of the people I’m sure you’re used to dealing with. If you can show me some articles, some studies, which has shown a ‘revulsion of same-sex behavior in animals’, I would love to see it and it has the possibility of changing my mind. It might, at least, explain some of your own behavior.

Revusion against sexual behavior is a learned trait, not an inherited one. Nurture, not nature. ‘Homosexual preference’ is likely the same. Which I’m sure will get me reverse-flames but whatever, bite me dykes. If we didn’t know any better we’d do whatever felt good, regardless of gender.

Animals are sexually opportunistic. Prove otherwise.

Honestly, I don’t think anyone should get married, regardless of orientation or pairings. But that would require a complete re-write of how society interacts and raises their young. I’m sure we could invent some society that collectively raises their young, where marriage does not exist, ‘relationship contracts’ are the norm and commonly have time-limits and must be renewed when they expire, and both parties responsible for a birth pay child support to the rest of society so it can raise their young. But lets not get out of hand, here. We’re way more civilized then that. We’re not ANIMALS, right?

Originally Posted By name Denise Staffordâ??There exists no greater gift of love than these warnings I hast bestown upon theeâ?? â??Renaye Denise Stafford

In 2022, a 14-year-old white boy will go to school. He will be asked out by a black girl, and he will say yes. And no one will think this is strange or be reviled by it.

In 2067, a 14-year-old white boy will go to school. He will be asked out by another boy, and he will say yes. And no one will think this is strange or be reviled by it.

There. You’ve been warned. You’ll probably be so senile by 2067 that you won’t even realize it’s going on. You’ll despise everything those damn young’ns are doing and shake your brittle little fist at them from inside your ancient wooden house that barely meets environmental-efficiency standards of the time.

This is, assuming the world doesn’t end in 2012. Damn Aztecs set us up the bomb. :<

My grandma was kind of racist. Scared the hell out of me, but it makes sense. She was OLD. She was there when it started. The elderly are, by and large, disgusted by Obama’s election. They’ll ramble on about how the neighborhood is going to be full of ‘those blacks’ and how terrible the world is now. My wife works in a retirement home. I get to hear about this stuff everyday. And yes, it’s HILARIOUS.

It doesn’t matter one whit what you do about these ‘obnoxious lesbians’ right now. It matters what your kids do. And society, entertainment, lifestyle is changing. They’re listening to a lesbian right now on the radio. They watch bisexual situations and characters on TV. Some of their friends have come out of the closet. They’re probably not gay themselves, but they’re more tolerant then you are. And, as all parenting works this way, your IN-tolerance will only make them rebel against you in defiance. Their grandchildren will be even more tolerant. And by the time your great-grand-daughter is going on a play-date with the 7-year-old best friend who will eventually grow up to become her wife, you will be dead.

Welcome to the losing side. Get comfortable; it’s going to be a LONG ride.

This may seem a bit off the subject of Chelsea’s original article initially, and entirely politically incorrect, but if you’ll indulge me I would like to propose to you a postulation I believe to be entirely unique to me, and one I believe on which both many lesbians and women, as well as men can find plausible. I believe if you’ll read me with an open mind, you’ll find this goes straight to the heart of Chelsea’s article. I would like to present my personal theory of homosexual evolution which describes the forces on development by which homosexuality came about, why it persists, and why it’s incidence remains high.

Like mitochondrial DNA, I believe the genetic arrangement for the occurrence of homosexuality to be inherited entirely from our female parents. Our original homosexual ancestor, whenever she occurred, had to be a female. Why? Firstly we have to accept the relatively passive nature of female sexuality, and the aggressive nature of male sexuality among mammals as a given fact in nature. If behavior of modern apes parallel that of prehumans, a female had to have the original inherited genetic anomaly. Perhaps it occurred many times before in males, but a proto homosexual male in the fiercely competitive arena of prehuman reproduction would have little chance of passing on his genes due to his disinterest. A disinterested homosexual female, however, would face entirely different circumstance.

I’ll assume all are familiar with the concept of rape. The concept as we know it is modern and a product of our sapience. In earlier eras of evolution, what we now know as rape was likely looked upon as “just a little harder to seduce”. I’m sure our animal behavior aficionado who posts above can cite many exceptions to the rules, but for sake of indulgence, try to imagine the situation of a modern female homosexual cow, gorilla, or dog in estrus and her difficulty in avoiding copulation. To put it in a nutshell, I believe male violence of antiquity to be the very rootstock of your existence.

In know none of you by other than reading you, but I find many of you to be reasonable, insightful, and educated. I would value your reflections on my postulation. I realize vicious name calling is inherent to lesbian culture, but would ask you to try to curb it in any response you make. As a non-lesbian I find it confusing and difficult to translate into anything meaningful you’re trying to get across. I could expound on my postulation geometrically in it’s defense, but would need much more than the 500 words I like to allow myself for a blog response. I have mulled on my theory often and would like to know what you think. Regards.

My wife was surfing the web and somehow for whatever reason ran across this mess and had me read it. I’ve go t to respond to this.
You seem to think the fact that marriage centers on procreation is no reason for it to not be expanded to other “relationships” which don’t have procreation. You must feel the importance of procreation is equal to the importance of the needs for these other relationships and procreation therefore not unique and special. Therefore the expansion of marriage is justified to include non-procreative relationships because all in all, procreation is not really all that important.
Now what I’m going to splain to you here is something so simple to most people it doesn’t even deserve brought up. Procreation is not just kind of important. PROCREATION IS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL TO THE SURVIVAL AND CONTINUATION OF THE HUMAN RACE!!! PROCREATION IS THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT HUMAN FUNCTION!!! ALL OTHER ACTIVITY PALE IN IMPORTANCE TO PROCREATION!!!
To look at procreation and it’s institution of marriage as some minor aspect of humanity, (to be overly kind), is either retarded, (at best), or insane, (worst condition for someone who actually believes something so utterly stupid). What’s wrong with you? What kind of brain damage could you possibly have to entertain such outlandish ideas!!? Are you completely nuts!!!? Do you ever have a rational thought??! We’re talking about the very core of human existance here!!! Not some bowling league!!! No wonder most you people don’t never amount to anything. Until I read this column I didn’t know what a mently dehabilitating handicap lesbian is.

Chelsea, thanks for the article. I enjoyed reading it. As for Denise, I would be perfectly happy if you deleted all of her trolling comments. She obviously took a wrong turn when she ended up on a blog for decent and humane women who are lesbians.

steadycat´s last blog post..HAPPY LOVE YOURSELF NEW YEAR

Denise,

Your opinions are a bit coarse but they’re certainly thought provocative. I don’t agree with most of your ideas but I admire your power of putting them through. No doubt you speak your mind. You remind me of my grandmother. She didn’t mince words. The only difference is she was generally right. But you’d have to be a riot to hang with. I don’t think you hate anyone. You seem pretty educated so it worries me your prediction about activism causing problems might come true. You’ve turned what is normally namby pamby reading into something interesting. I read this often but have always been afraid of being rejected or getting in trouble somehow if I responded. But I figured if they were printing some of the things you said they might print mine. I’m going to try and we’ll see.

Hi. Denise? Yeah. Um. This is a bit embarrassing but, uh… I intend to have a comprehensive reply later, I’m still totally interested in discourse with you. Absolutely, let’s keep going.

But I feel I should tell you. When you enter your name in the ‘name’ field, you’re supposed to delete out the default text that says ‘name’. So that the only thing displayed is ‘Denise Stafford’ instead of ‘name Denise Stafford ‘.

…or ‘name Derek Simmons’, or ‘name Jeanene Smith’. Or whatever you come up with next. I’m just sayin’, if you’re going to go all sock-puppet on us, please do not repeat the same mistake and use the same speech-mannerisms across all of your respective puppets. Also don’t link the URLs of your puppets all to the exact same place. It makes it really painfully obvious.

You’re really quite fun, Denise. I’ll get to your animal hypothesis later tonight, k? And I’ll respond to, uh, ‘Derek’ as well, though that’s going to be all post-human and might be a bit beyond your understand. Or Derek’s. Or whatever.

Hope this helps!

Reply – Quote´s last blog post..Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

Yeah,

Embarrassing as hell. “Nauseatingly” embarrassing to tell the truth. I thought about using a different terminal because of that URL, but got careless. I didn’t even consider the email thing though.

I want you to know I’ve gained a genuine affection for all of you who’ve responded. Especially the gentler hearts who expressed themselves so innocently. Little pangs of guilt there while reading them. Difficult to counter those so openly honest and twist the blade while being deceitful.

The results weren’t what I expected. I didn’t find the militancy I was looking for. Or maybe hoping for to be honest for once. The “warning” theme I hugged to during this was completely contrived. It was just a reason I needed to show up somewhere I had no business. A phony crusading Paul Revere exposed.

I won’t try to justify what I’ve done here. But I’ve had it in for you people for some time because of my older sister. Everyone loves their sister so I won’t go on about how decent and honest and loving she is. But you would not believe how she’s been taken advantage of by these “friends” she’s taken up with through her life. I can tell none of you fit this category, but more fraudulent, deceitful, dishonest, and even cruel people you’ll never find. She’s had her credit cards abused to the point she had to declare bankruptcy. Last month was the last straw when she was hospitalized for injuries she incurred in a brawl. This was so out of character for her I started asking around in her circle. Sure enough, the little no-income “thing” who’s been living off her for the last year, the very one who pawned my sister’s car causing her to loose her job, set her up for it. And why?

It’s easy to blame a group for the actions of a few if you’re not part of it. Sorry for any hurt feelings, goodbye, and good luck. Denise Stafford

Not at all dear Denise:
The degree to which you are in denial about being a bigot is astounding. Claiming marriage is only for having children? What a specious rationalization for the denial of equal rights and privileges. That would preclude women who have had hysterectomies from getting married. Trying to blame your own alleged physical revulsion and nausea on the people you are disrespecting rather than acknowledging your own psychological problems could be construed as a form of projection. Your lame rationalizations for discrimination seem akin to the recitations of a brainwashed child Ku Klux Klansmen who have grown up without having the experience or open mindedness necessary for cogent cogitation on the subject. No matter how articulate you might be, your verbosity cannot obfuscate the degree of your bigotry. Oh, gee, I’m “sorry” if I compared your sexual-orientation bias to other kinds of bias you might not be involved in. Marge96