California Proposition 8

[ASPCA4EVER]

TopGun Said: I don't think bigots should be allowed to marry and procreate and should at all costs be kept away from children and off the internet... but there's no law to that effect obviously.

DITTO and that's something that quite a few rural doctors used to do to families that wouldn't let their daughters leave home...they just quietly fixed them to protect them from the controlling fathers that didn't let them grow up!!! If you get my drift...sterilization used to be done for the 'mentally impaired' maybe we should do this before some are allowed to 'BREED'.

 

[top gun]

DITTO and that's something that quite a few rural doctors used to do to families that wouldn't let their daughters leave home...they just quietly fixed them to protect them from the controlling fathers that didn't let them grow up!!! If you get my drift...sterilization used to be done for the 'mentally impaired' maybe we should do this before some are allowed to 'BREED'.

It's just a crazy world sometimes isn't it?

All we can do is promote fairness and try to cancel out the ridiculous and/or bigoted arguments with some real world, real people type situations & facts.

Thanks for participating in that... every little bit helps!

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

It's just a crazy world sometimes isn't it?

All we can do is promote fairness and try to cancel out the ridiculous and/or bigoted arguments with some real world, real people type situations & facts.

Thanks for participating in that... every little bit helps!

I may be new but I can easily spot a 'perverted deviant' poster who loves to obfuscate the topics!!! And as with the other most recent topic that has to do with sexual perversion...I'm leaving that 'road kill' right where it belongs...in the IGNORE and AVOID....if you know what I mean

 

[Sihouette]

Ignorance screams the loudest as they say...


I guess we can all pretend that sexual-fixation isn't acquirable by mammals; that the AI industry doesn't exist. We can stick our fingers in our ears and yell "na na na na na" till the cows come home..the same cows we get the milk from, having been freshened by mail-order semen from a bull 1,000s of miles away who only now becomes sexually stimulated by his steer friend..having been trained to fixate on steers via classical associative conditioning at puberty: also known as "training".

We can pretend that humans don't learn by example. Funny the very argument used here, that we are not like animals, is the same argument turned on its head to say that deviant-sexuals are "born that way" and "can't learn new ways" [like a fish or a python]. Yet somehow they are "higher than other mammals".

Well, which is it, are they reflexive ameobas or expansive beings? Let me guess, when it is convenient they are one, and when it is convenient elsewhere, they are its opposite. Or could it be that they are simply high-functioning mammals that are at once subject to associative conditioning and once fixated thusly, believe themselves to be above all that?

I can tell you that their denial won't protect future generations from their same fate..

 

[top gun]

Ignorance screams the loudest as they say...


I guess we can all pretend that sexual-fixation isn't acquirable by mammals; that the AI industry doesn't exist. We can stick our fingers in our ears and yell "na na na na na" till the cows come home..the same cows we get the milk from, having been freshened by mail-order semen from a bull 1,000s of miles away who only now becomes sexually stimulated by his steer friend..having been trained to fixate on steers via classical associative conditioning at puberty: also known as "training".

We can pretend that humans don't learn by example. Funny the very argument used here, that we are not like animals, is the same argument turned on its head to say that deviant-sexuals are "born that way" and "can't learn new ways" [like a fish or a python]. Yet somehow they are "higher than other mammals".

Well, which is it, are they reflexive ameobas or expansive beings? Let me guess, when it is convenient they are one, and when it is convenient elsewhere, they are its opposite. Or could it be that they are simply high-functioning mammals that are at once subject to associative conditioning and once fixated thusly, believe themselves to be above all that?

I can tell you that their denial won't protect future generations from their same fate..

As crazy as you talk I bet your animals are even afraid of you!

You have yet to make a single rational point about human beings. Monkeys eating their own poo you're all over it. Confusing steers and importing bull semen you have handfuls of it.

But anything ANYTHING related to the science of the human brain and the physical and physiological nature of HUMANS... well we might as well be talking to you about building a nuclear reactor because you have not a single clue!

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Ignorance screams the loudest as they say...


I guess we can all pretend that sexual-fixation isn't acquirable by mammals; that the AI industry doesn't exist. We can stick our fingers in our ears and yell "na na na na na" till the cows come home..the same cows we get the milk from, having been freshened by mail-order semen from a bull 1,000s of miles away who only now becomes sexually stimulated by his steer friend..having been trained to fixate on steers via classical associative conditioning at puberty: also known as "training".

We can pretend that humans don't learn by example. Funny the very argument used here, that we are not like animals, is the same argument turned on its head to say that deviant-sexuals are "born that way" and "can't learn new ways" [like a fish or a python]. Yet somehow they are "higher than other mammals".

Well, which is it, are they reflexive ameobas or expansive beings? Let me guess, when it is convenient they are one, and when it is convenient elsewhere, they are its opposite. Or could it be that they are simply high-functioning mammals that are at once subject to associative conditioning and once fixated thusly, believe themselves to be above all that?

I can tell you that their denial won't protect future generations from their same fate..

You make my points for me with every post by exhibiting a total ignorance of biology. As soon as you and the AI industry are able to keep human children in farrowing cages, veal crates, feed lots, and battery cages then you can show us how your sexual deviant career works, but until then you're just another bigot with a loud voice and hair in your ears.

 

[Sihouette]

Here's your "logic" Mare [let me guess, you never took a course in it right?]

"Sil says mammals can be taught their sexual preference by associative conditioning, from human observation and comparative psychology from studies with other mammals"

Ergo:

"If I can prove that humans aren't animals [by saying they aren't kept in cages...well, except prison cages...], then Sil's argument is moot".

ROFLMAO...


Here's the deal, I agree with you on your tangent-diversion subject of animal cruelty...meant to denigrate my credibility and undermine my potent points about comparative psychology, social contagions and human behavior...lol..

My animals love me. They are all well fed, in large paddocks and breathing the freshest air and basking in sunshine and cool breezes alternatively. I voted for recent legislation in my state that promotes their being kept in larger production pens, even at the cost of higher food prices, while my own budget is fairly tight as it is..

So there's your "cruelty"..lol..

You cannot logically deduce that because we don't keep most humans in cages, that we "therefore" aren't subject to animal drives and conditioned reflexes! It's like seeing a horse out in a field and "deducing" that it cannot be an animal because it isn't in a cage...lol.. Talk about your "twaddle". You are a very poor spindoctor Mare. Please brush up on your skills..

 

[Sihouette]

The purpose of the evolution of two separate genders from our very distant roots of asexual reproduction, "budding" if you will, was to reproduce the species in such a manner as to foster a greater genetic diversity and thus survival of the species. The AI industry has found that mammalian sexuality is malleable to such an extent via associative conditioning, that if you take a normal male animal and present him with estrus cues such as an estrus female present nearby or a rag soaked with her estrus urine, you can "train" him to release onto other male animals, a dummy mount and so on. In no time at all he will come to prefer the sights, smells and sounds associated with the new "passion-object" and not even an estrus female presented right in front of him to mount. Yes, it's true.

Taken forward, comparative pschology, championed by people like Darwin, Pavlov and Skinner, to name the most prominent of scores, we can extrapolate that because we are also, factually, mammals, we too are subject to the same ability to be "trained" via our first sexual experiences to only prefer a certain set of stimuli from then on.

So the gay argument holds some water in that they are partly right, they cannot be retrained. With the AI industry careful steps are taken to not "spoil' a good stud animal by allowing him free access to females before he is trained. It is better if their drives are first frustrated a little by no access and then the only "normal" sex they can experience is that which is foisted upon them by environmental factors...in most cases their human handlers and a very specific regime set up for the collection of semen in a safe environment. Once trained, they are like push-button...very easy to get to climax by just the sounds and smells of the "first" associatve environment..

Another thing human psychology and comparative anthropology teaches us is that humans are social-learners. Probably moreso than any other animal species. Now, add that social-contagion factor to the fact that sexual-preference can be conditioned by environmental pressures.

And then read the article Conditioning and Sexual Behavior: A Review again: http://www-psychology.concordia.ca/fac/pfaus/Pfaus-Kippin-Centeno(2001).pdf

If deviant sexuality becomes mainstreamed, we can deduce, logically, that the numbers of deviants within a given population will rise. The frog will slowly boil in the pan but not from what is originally thought: a process of higher reasoning. Instead, that frog will slowly boil in the pan because over generations we can predict that deviant sexuals within our population [and therefore empathy towards themselves essentially] will rise, via associative conditioning and environmental pressures, to such numbers that the way Prop 8 tried to define "normalcy" will indeed be seen as "abnormal"' because by then it will be...

...Higher reasoning has very little to do with socially-manipulating powerful and malleable sexual drives..

My last point is that not everyone opposed to gay marriage is a christian zealot. How many christians you know believe in comparative psychology and evolution? Yes, that's right. Thinking people also object. However, no matter what your background, you will be hounded being called "homophobe" and so on, and witch-hunted like the beauty-contest girl for having a lucid opinion that opposes the gay tidal wave of special-interest pressure.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Here's your "logic" Mare [let me guess, you never took a course in it right?]

"Sil says mammals can be taught their sexual preference by associative conditioning, from human observation and comparative psychology from studies with other mammals"

Ergo:"If I can prove that humans aren't animals [by saying they aren't kept in cages...well, except prison cages...], then Sil's argument is moot".

Here's the deal, I agree with you on your tangent-diversion subject of animal cruelty...meant to denigrate my credibility and undermine my potent points about comparative psychology, social contagions and human behavior...lol..

My animals love me. They are all well fed, in large paddocks and breathing the freshest air and basking in sunshine and cool breezes alternatively. I voted for recent legislation in my state that promotes their being kept in larger production pens, even at the cost of higher food prices, while my own budget is fairly tight as it is..

So there's your "cruelty"..lol..

You cannot logically deduce that because we don't keep most humans in cages, that we "therefore" aren't subject to animal drives and conditioned reflexes! It's like seeing a horse out in a field and "deducing" that it cannot be an animal because it isn't in a cage...lol.. Talk about your "twaddle". You are a very poor spindoctor Mare. Please brush up on your skills..

If it's cruel to people, then it's cruel to animals. A lot of slave owners used the same argument that you just did: I love my slaves and treat them like family. However, slaves are still slaves whether they are animal slaves or human slaves. You don't keep them except to exploit them, steal their children to be sold for slaughter, squeeze out their bodily fluids for sale to others, and when you have taken all they have to give you render them down into glue. Nice, for you, but for them it's still slavery.

You don't read carefully, I never said that humans were not animals. I said that you cannot extrapolate from domesticated animals because they are not in possession of their own selves now and have not been for thousands of generations.

If you and the AI community were all that "cutting edge" in the field of human psychology then we'd see some cross-over with you citing journal articles to which your research had contributed and journal articles giving you and your cronies credit for your valuable contribution to the field of human psychology. That isn't what's happening though, in fact just the opposite is happening, psychologists say your are full of a bucolic end product.

Your animals love you? Do you remember your comment about Stockholm Syndrome?

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

The purpose of the evolution of two separate genders from our very distant roots of asexual reproduction, "budding" if you will, was to reproduce the species in such a manner as to foster a greater genetic diversity and thus survival of the species. The AI industry has found that mammalian sexuality is malleable to such an extent via associative conditioning, that if you take a normal male animal and present him with estrus cues such as an estrus female present nearby or a rag soaked with her estrus urine, you can "train" him to release onto other male animals, a dummy mount and so on. In no time at all he will come to prefer the sights, smells and sounds associated with the new "passion-object" and not even an estrus female presented right in front of him to mount. Yes, it's true.

Taken forward, comparative pschology, championed by people like Darwin, Pavlov and Skinner, to name the most prominent of scores, we can extrapolate that because we are also, factually, mammals, we too are subject to the same ability to be "trained" via our first sexual experiences to only prefer a certain set of stimuli from then on.

So the gay argument holds some water in that they are partly right, they cannot be retrained. With the AI industry careful steps are taken to not "spoil' a good stud animal by allowing him free access to females before he is trained. It is better if their drives are first frustrated a little by no access and then the only "normal" sex they can experience is that which is foisted upon them by environmental factors...in most cases their human handlers and a very specific regime set up for the collection of semen in a safe environment. Once trained, they are like push-button...very easy to get to climax by just the sounds and smells of the "first" associatve environment..

Another thing human psychology and comparative anthropology teaches us is that humans are social-learners. Probably moreso than any other animal species. Now, add that social-contagion factor to the fact that sexual-preference can be conditioned by environmental pressures.

And then read the article Conditioning and Sexual Behavior: A Review again: http://www-psychology.concordia.ca/fac/pfaus/Pfaus-Kippin-Centeno(2001).pdf

If deviant sexuality becomes mainstreamed, we can deduce, logically, that the numbers of deviants within a given population will rise. The frog will slowly boil in the pan but not from what is originally thought: a process of higher reasoning. Instead, that frog will slowly boil in the pan because over generations we can predict that deviant sexuals within our population [and therefore empathy towards themselves essentially] will rise, via associative conditioning and environmental pressures, to such numbers that the way Prop 8 tried to define "normalcy" will indeed be seen as "abnormal"' because by then it will be...

...Higher reasoning has very little to do with socially-manipulating powerful and malleable sexual drives..

My last point is that not everyone opposed to gay marriage is a christian zealot. How many christians you know believe in comparative psychology and evolution? Yes, that's right. Thinking people also object. However, no matter what your background, you will be hounded being called "homophobe" and so on, and witch-hunted like the beauty-contest girl for having a lucid opinion that opposes the gay tidal wave of special-interest pressure.

I read your article and it was interesting. Like I said before, if you can keep children in cages and control their whole existences, then you will have at least a percentage of success with your techniques, but short of that it won't work because there are simply too many competing influences. More than a million children have been raised by gay parents in this country now and follow up studies show no increase in the incidence of homosexual orientation between those children and children raised in heterosexual families.

One of the reasons that scientists do field studies is that it's easy to collect information that suggests a certain outcome, but when in the field one can discover that the supposed outcome may in fact be incorrect. Such is the case with you fear-based theory. You insist that a one to one extrapolation from your captive, domesticated animals will apply universally to wild humans, but the field work and a few thousand years of history say that you are wrong.

 

[Sihouette]

Like I said before, if you can keep children in cages and control their whole existences, then you will have at least a percentage of success with your techniques, but short of that it won't work because there are simply too many competing influences. ~Mare

Yes, competing influences....so human behavior is subject to influence according to you. Glad you cleared that up for the record. You mean like an entire society putting it's stamp on deviant sexuality as "normal" via granting marriage rights to gays...influences like that? [Or no! Not that influence!...lol..]

We all live in a big cage, sir, called "human social constructs"...

We are in agreement then. The big social experiment and its predicatable outcome [thanks to the AI industry's and comparative psychology's contributing data] will be a surge in the numbers of deviant sexuals within a given population if society agrees to de facto normalize deviant sexuality by granting it marriage status..

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Yes, competing influences....so human behavior is subject to influence according to you. Glad you cleared that up for the record. You mean like an entire society putting it's stamp on deviant sexuality as "normal" via granting marriage rights to gays...influences like that? [Or no! Not that influence!...lol..]

We all live in a big cage, sir, called "human social constructs"...

We are in agreement then. The big social experiment and its predicatable outcome [thanks to the AI industry's and comparative psychology's contributing data] will be a surge in the numbers of deviant sexuals within a given population if society agrees to de facto normalize deviant sexuality by granting it marriage status..

Anyone can take a statement from the sublime to the ridiculous as you have just done, doesn't mean that you're correct.

If the earth is a cage, then why do you have to confine your animals? If your theory was correct then we would see that it has come to fruition in at least ONE of the cultures that has accepted gay and trans-people, but such is not the case. I know you are desperate to believe this idea of yours, but there isn't anything--except in your mind--to make it believable.

If this is a case of you having lost someone dear to you, then I'm sorry for you, but that's the way life is and hurting others will not assuage your pain in the long run.

 

[Sihouette]

OK, you want an example of taking something sublime and twisting it to ridiculous?

How about something sublime and taking to insanity?

Here's one example: a man born with a penis who considers that appendage a "birth defect" because he allowed his untreated psychological condition of hating maleness to go to his head and convince him to mutilate his body and justify it by saying his penis was a "birth defect".


Not only have you done this to yourself, but you want what you did to be seen as normal behavior....

In a world of monkey-see, monkey-do, you sir are the poster child for how far deviant insanity would go if allowed the stamp of normalcy. Imagine a world of boys uncomfortable with the demands of maleness [as I imagine many are growing up] suddenly seeing amputation of their genitals as "normal correction of a birth defect."

Jesus H. Christ....

 

[Sihouette]

Your own words Mare

..Since my brain works like a female one and I am more comfortable dealing with the world from the female perspective..

...My depression started when I began puberty around 11 years of age, by 15 I was suicidal and I dealt with suicidal ideation, fantisizing about my own death, and struggling with a sense of hopelessness that was worse than the depression on a daily basis. I could not look into a mirror without feeling a sense of rage and hatred that was so strong that it made me want to take a knife and cut myself to get out of me....

...I would never be able to be truly myself as long as I had a penis, a penis means you're a man...

..PLUSSES: fewer birthday and Christmas presents to buy (no brothers), I get to be who I feel like I am every day, no depression, no hopelessness, less body hair (ugh!), JOY, happiness, satisfaction, peace of mind, pretty clothes, perfume, fun shoes, no insane, endless, my-dick-is-bigger-than-yours male competition, social life, no suicidal ideation, much more capacity to interact with the world, no self-hatred, loving myself, being happy with who I see in the mirror every day, the camaraderie of women, less interaction with men, no more struggles to behave like a man so that men wouldn't beat the sh1t out of me for being queer
~ Page 20

Just for giggles, instead of citing complex hormonal imbalances for your affectation, perhaps, just perhaps your belief that your "brain is female" might actually be because you have willed it to be from your quite obvious disdain for your maleness and identification with males in general. Wearing "pretty clothes", "perfume" and "fun shoes" is a learned taste, not an innate one that is soley estrogen-based. Your admitted "self-hatred" is indicative of acquired psychosis rather than anything you were born with.

Anyone who hates themselves based on what swings [or doesn't] between their legs isn't necessarily suffering from a hormone imbalance, but rather an internal mental conflict instead that has assigned "bad" to the gender one is rejecting.. Any MD who has caved to your own clever use of language and hypochondria and colluded to amputate your body parts instead of getting in your grill and commiting you to an institution for intensive regressive therapy, should have his/her license revoked.

I imagine you went through quite a few before you found one who "agreed" to do this mutilation to your body. Kudos. Your persistence paid off. But if I have my way about it, your persitence in this debate will not.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

OK, you want an example of taking something sublime and twisting it to ridiculous?

How about something sublime and taking to insanity?

Here's one example: a man born with a penis who considers that appendage a "birth defect" because he allowed his untreated psychological condition of hating maleness to go to his head and convince him to mutilate his body and justify it by saying his penis was a "birth defect".


Not only have you done this to yourself, but you want what you did to be seen as normal behavior....

In a world of monkey-see, monkey-do, you sir are the poster child for how far deviant insanity would go if allowed the stamp of normalcy. Imagine a world of boys uncomfortable with the demands of maleness [as I imagine many are growing up] suddenly seeing amputation of their genitals as "normal correction of a birth defect."

Jesus H. Christ....

Your lack of biological expertise is showing again, Siho. Why don't you look up gilles de la tourette syndrome. At one time people almost as ignorant as you stated that it was impossible for someone to involuntarilly shout out the least socially acceptable thing in a crowded room, people who did that had to be evil people or possessed by demons. Some of us know better now, just like some of us know more about the biological basis for transsexualism. Too bad you aren't one of them.