Why did homosexuality become stigmatized to such a great degree? What's the deal with that?

If anything, this "lust" is a narcissistic vice that has always been associated with power. You're a degenerate, whether you're giving or receiving.

People thing it wasn't stigmatized in the past but it wasn't accepted either.
Kind of this grey zone but modern revisionism likes to say otherwise.

I'm not interested in your conceptions of morality, jew-spawn.

>stone age
Ogg says to Grogg that he has a nice ass. Grogg says that's fucking gay. "What is gay", asks Ogg. "I don't fucking know but you're doing it, faggot"

"I think I love you", says Ogg.
"What the fuck is that?" Replies Grogg
"No, you're supposed to say what is-"
"Stfu faggot"

The notion of homosexuality as an identity is a rather modern one. Fucking guys has been a prevalent practice in a multitude of societies throughout history. The practice was rarely something that defined you as a person, as being gay or bi, it was just something that you happened to do. And most practitioners enjoyed heterosexual relationships alongside it.

I'm sure that's what it will be like once again, once we move past the obsession with identity politics that plagues our society at the moment.

Because despite our pretensions of enlightenment, sexual liberation and liberalism, fucking another guy probably has way more baggage attached to it nowadays than at most points in human history.

Actually if you think about it it's worse than ever now. Hundreds of years ago fucking guys wasn't something that defined you as a person, as being gay or bi, it was just something that you happened to do. The notion of being gay as an identity is something from the 20th century.

A good fuck, just not a respectable man.

I don't know. Pure homosexual men that will only get aroused by other men exist. They're the base core of the male gay identity imho.

>Pure homosexual men that will only get aroused by other men exist.
There's no such thing

I don't doubt that purely gay men exist but in the classical world it was at least expected that these men would father children, where they got their jollies on the side wasn't of much concern as long as they kept it private.

The main point however is that rigid sexuality, straight or gay, is a more modern and arbitrary conception than most people realize, with the majority falling somewhere in the grey middle.

I understand it's a continuum but some homos are like 90% androphilic but they still prefer men most of the time. they can get aroused by women but due special circumstances.

>as long as they kept it private
yeah and when it goes inevitably public: scandal. society still stigmatized it.

I'm thinking like Rome, and I don't remember it being particularly scandalous. If word got out that you fucked boys you might get some ribbing in the forum but nothing like being put on trial by the inquisition.

It was a downright institution in Greece.

yeah, men with high social status will almost be forgiven unless the attack is politically motivated. Cronies in Roman forums forgiving each other for fucking sheep, children, and their daughters don't count.

Well where exactly was it stigmatized then? Unless you were taking it up the ass on the regular fucking boys was just another thing you fucked.

It is a highly uncivilized behaviour. I do not understand why people think acceptance of homosexuality is a mark of culture and sophistication.

Wiping your ass with your bare hands is not considered civilized because it is a very disease-prone behavior. Eating carrion is not considered civilized because it is very disease-prone behavior.

Male homosexual acts were until very recently not considered civilized because it is a very disease-prone behavior, involving lots of bodily fluids mixing with feces as gay activists are eager to tell us.

spreadingsantorum.com

I continue to find the male homosexual acts uncivilized because as far as I can tell it still involves men frolicking in each others' feces. Young people may think this is awesome but that is not progress to me.

I do not see normalization of homosexuality as progress. If we got to the point where everyone was cool with bare-handed ass-wiping, I wouldn't see that as progress either.

Revulsion (homophobia if you will) is not irrational at all. It is a healthy response to a dangerous disease pathway. Gay men have off the charts rates of HIV/Aids, Anal Cancer, Chlamydia, Giardia, Herpes, Gonorrhea, Hepatitis and Syphilis.

If there is a ever movement to normalize the eating of carrion, I want no part of that either. I suppose that is next.

Would you say the same of any activity that is potentially unhealthy? Such as drinking?

>Homosexuality is a modern invention
[citation needed]

Taking dick is a girl thing. It's like crying. It's associated with women.

It's /r9k/-ish but it honestly is that simple.

Drinking is unhealthy, yes. But sodomy is a vector for crippling, disfiguring, sterilising and sometimes deadly diseases.

Being a practising faggot is way worse than being a smoker or a drunk. Worse on so many levels. We disseminate propaganda teaching our kids not to drink or smoke, yet we teach then that it is perfectly acceptable, even laudable behaviour, to be a faggot who sleeps with other men.

Always stigmatized due to being minority, as someone always said.

Doesn't mean stigma is good or reflective of some moral ideal or anything.

If you mean legal or religious oppression, well when you're trying to spread an ideology, a good way to do it is through reproduction. If some people don't reproduce due to their lifestyle, then the dogma of the ideology simply needs to remove those people from the ideology.

It's an ideological defense mechanism. It didn't arise one day out of someone's hand-writhing scheming necessarily, so much as it was a consequence of trying to create behavioral unity and new adherents.

Intellectual contagion.

The notion of "being a homosexual" rather than "being a man who has engaged in sexual acts with men" is a modern invention.

Socrates, for example, had two wives (at once?) and something like nine kids between the two of them, and every other dialogue he's engaging in the sampling of boipucci.

People used to simply think of themselves as being individuals who had sex with other men/women. A woman marries a man, and gives him kids. If she diddles other women (would that by girlcock?) on the side then it doesn't make her part of some discrete category or mean she's part of some group as the sociologists would have it. Fucking people of the same gender did not put you into some sort of fuck-tribe.

Ass stuff bad.
Any other gay acts not involving ass is okay. Toys in ass okay provided it is cleaned, you cleaned your ass.

Compromises gender roles and identities... weakens principles that support the foundation of family unit.

>The notion of "being a homosexual" rather than "being a man who has engaged in sexual acts with men" is a modern invention.

1) There is such a thing as Lesbianism, too.
2) Many people were engaged in long term exclusively homosexual relationships throughout history. Whether you like homosexuality or not, this is plain as day.

In pre-Christian Rome and Greece, there had been some debate on which form of sexuality was preferable. While many people seemed to not oppose bisexuality, there were those who preferred to be exclusively heterosexual or homosexual. For example, a debate between homosexual and heterosexual love was included in Plutarch's Moralia.

It doesn't take much to be a homosexual. It happens with animals.

It happens with humans.

If you have the simple adult realization that the object of your affection is foremost a conscious being and secondarily a body, the object of your affection, out of attachment to a conscious being, can very quickly become a person of the same sex. Add on top of that sexual lust, and boom, you have homosexuality.

How could something so inevitable possibly be a "modern invention."

That's revisionism at its finest.

>Being a practising faggot is way worse than being a smoker or a drunk. Worse on so many levels. We disseminate propaganda teaching our kids not to drink or smoke, yet we teach then that it is perfectly acceptable, even laudable behaviour, to be a faggot who sleeps with other men.
...

>Thinks practicing anal sex with a condom and with a person who you are comfortable with and who you know don't have STDs is worse than destroying the cells in your lungs with smoke and increasing risk of cancer, or trashing your kidneys with booze and causing memory loss, etc.

>uses pejorative for homosexual

>clearly in the moralist camp, though tries to approach from a pseudo-health-expert perspective

>implies homosexuality HAS to be balls-to-the-wall promiscuity in which you let multiple dicks come inside your ass without protection every night.

Heterosexuality can result in all the same things you say homosexuality results in, provided there are unsafe sex practices, promiscuity, drugs, and prolonged raw fucking involved. You act like every homosexual man is a whore.

You also act like homosexuality is exclusively male-on-male. More evidence of bias. Nothing to see here, move along folks, this guys objections are pulled out of his ass.

> It's like crying. It's associated with women.

Men who pretend they never cry make me laugh.

Abrahamics

They hate fun and life in general.

>this guys objects are pulled out of his ass.

ftfy

It's genuinely harder to cry if you're on testosterone. Ask any transsexual.

Chlamydia.

Some people think homosexuality is a choice that will spread in popularity if it isn't actively suppressed and stigmatized. Ironically this belief is most common among closeted homosexuals that think everyone is like them. I think the more rational thing to believe is there are a certain amount of people that are homosexual in any society, and there are less problems for society if you let them be.

they called you a bugger or sodomite

there were also terms for lovers in greece.

butthole is for pooping

>Autism the post

Fuck faggots
Anyone who thinks they're tolerable needs to be shot

More or less this but also homosexuality corrupts male camaraderie because it reduces the beauty of platonic male love to a sterile fleshly act involving the excreting organ.

Male friendships are special because they are not physical; they require only a true meeting of the minds and spirit. The bond between friends is sacred and to profane it with sex is perverse.

>some ribbing
it was an Infamia to be a bottom in Rome. And that stuck to you and your reputation forever

Tell that to my faggot dogs

Faggots themselves
youtube.com/watch?v=f8iCylc7x2g

>dog does it
>so i must do it

>The notion of homosexuality as an identity is a rather modern one.

This is what really bothers me about homosexuality. People write crappy poems and weird films about how having sex with men defines them but people like the ancient Greeks or Allan Bloom who happen to like intercourse with men while not focusing on it are pretty cool. They put the bussy on a pedestal but it is just an act and a preference or taste.

Heteros aren't going around defining themselves by their love of women. Some of the best artists in the past were homosexual and some of the worst today are too and I think the difference is this idea of identity.

At least religious identities point to a metaphysics and an ethics, a racial identity points to forefathers, heritage and culture and political identities point to a certain way of life. But homosexuality? It is just about buttholes.

If I vote based on being Christian or Muslim or because I appreciate a certain political ideology or love Western culture then it makes sense but if I vote because I like the bussy it is retarded. Plus flamboyant gays are annoying, the stereotype of a dickish, feminine numale is just so unaesthetic. I am Muslim by the way.

>Heteros aren't going around defining themselves by their love of women
uhh....

Because homosexuality is gay

Not all heteros are Chads user.

I never said otherwise. In fact I explicitly said the stigma was only for receivers.

There are no straight pride parades, or associations of heterosexuals that have specific political agendas. Enjoying sex and writing poetry about it or waxing lyrical or bragging about it is one thing but what modern homosexuals do is very specific.

Pleasure is pleasure. No creature refuses that.

End of story so stop pushing your retarded modern agenda. If it feels good, you typically try to do it. Why do you think people eat sweet and salty foods knowing its bad? Even birds wont pass on the opportunity to get drunk enough to black out.

>1) There is such a thing as Lesbianism, too.

yes yuo are a creature for sure but men control themselves

Have you ever seen someone identify themselves as a heterosexual man in conversation without them being one of those privilege checking types?

>men control themselves
>he thinks humanity has self-control

If that were true war and addiction wouldn't exist. go home putin

>1) There is such a thing as Lesbianism, too.

Of course but Lesbians are useless.
Like everything in the LGBT community of note and has been done by males and women who were born as males.

some men let god help them and others want to play around

nothing new

do svidaniya )))))

But addiction can be overcome through self-control.
I saw an Indian (American Indian)literally gain an alcohol addiction and overcome it within like 5-6 days which is fucking crazy considering alcohol is like liquid doom to them.

I had to deal with the cops because he went Cold Turkey and was screaming like a bitch in his room so loudly so people called the police on me since they thought I was raping someone and my other roommate is on the sex offenders list (he exchanged naked pics to his gf when both were 16).

But earlier culture informed religion.

Its just nature itself, we need to be able To reproduce yo survive

How is it associated with power? I understand how one could call wanting to fuck someone of the same sex narcissistic but how is it associated with power? Do you mean dominating someone of the same sex?

>t. are ian mustard race

This is why I find it hard to believe when someone says they're only attracted to guys. Scientific explanations of homosexuality cite a hormone that is associated with friendship and forming bonds, they assume homosex was an evolutionary trait we evolved to be able to form closer social bonds. But it's not something that we can be solely attracted to sexually. Some can adopt a fetish of sorts for sex with men but that's all it is, a fetish. You can still fuck women, stop role playing faggots.

I really don't give a fuck if you take it in the ass but don't act like you're solely attracted to men, most fags aren't. But you have to realize that butt sex does hurt your butthole, not just making it sore for a while but in the long term as well. You will have a leaky ass when you're old.

Just saying.

not to mention the fact that you have to $$$BUY$$$ lubrication to make it work because again your butt is not made for that

>unironically being a little bitch

Fucking clown trolls. The discussion was over whether homosexuality existed before modern times, not your repugnant opinions.

unironically spending his whole life suppressing emotions and acting like it's healthy and good.

The only reason you avoid crying is to appear like TUFF STUFF in front of other insecure men who want to avoid crying to appear like TUFF STUFF.... etc.

You're taken in hook line and sinker by bullshit, and act like you're better for it. Even my grandfather, a Korean war vet who saw combat, broke down into tears from time to time.

That's life, baby

Why can't I marry a 12 year old?

Having sex with males (you being male) is not the same as craving emotional intimacy with a male in the same way others (heteros) do with women. The fact that you reduce homosexuality to anal penetration is also myopic, and the very reason why the gay identiy exists (when you erase or negate a group of people particular phenomenology, you create the need to build a common sub cuture / identity)

You're not a muslim prophet.

>not being a stoic
>being a slave to your own emotions

Disgusting

What do you say about straight men who have anal sex with straight women?

Or about the romantic attraction between the same sex in lieu of the sexual attraction?

Basically: Parents want their children to reproduce, homosexuals can't reproduce.

I haven't cried in years and haven't felt inclined to either, I'm not suppressing anything mane

how often do you cry and at what?

The homosexual identity was always stigmatized in the West, and didn't even exist in the modern sense until the Enlightenment.

As for you question about homosexual activity (mainly pederasty), it was stigmatized among the Meds due to Christianity. Some of the rest of Europe already though it was unhealthy before Christianity though (like the Vikings)

>my other roommate is on the sex offenders list (he exchanged naked pics to his gf when both were 16).

Do you live in Hell?

Not anyone of them, but now seriously, has lesbianism ever been persecuted? And if yes, to what extent?

I live in machismo ridden culture and while fags are hated "it's okay if ladies do it". Lesbians are only hated or disdained if they try to act manly, and an heterosexual woman who acts too manly will be called lesbian while an actual lesbian who is femenine will be mostly left alone.

"Land of the free"

Your disgust is an emotion to which you are clearly subject.

Better empathy moving someone to tears than """stoic""" disgust for people with different brain chemistry than you.

Real stoics behave the way you do minus the disgust. They are able to look at a person going through pain and feel neither extensive pity nor disgust.

Probably once a year, varies. Usually general buildup of things I can't change fucking my shit up. Diseases, etc.

>Probably once a year, varies. Usually general buildup of things I can't change fucking my shit up. Diseases, etc.
not everyone has AIDS breh

This
>A debate between homosexual and heterosexual love was included in Plutarch's Moralia. (c. 100AD)
>The Christian emperor Justinian (527–565) made homosexuals a scapegoat for problems such as "famines, earthquakes, and pestilences."
> In the year 390, the Christian emperors Valentinian II, Theodoisus and Arcadius declared homosexual sex to be illegal and those who were guilty of it were condemned to be burned alive in front of the public.
>A same-sex marriage between the two men Pedro Díaz and Muño Vandilaz in the Galician municipality of Rairiz de Veiga in Spain occurred on 16 April 1061. They were married by a priest at a small chapel. The historic documents about the church wedding were found at Monastery of San Salvador de Celanova.

Wow, look at that. Identity politics and homosexuality defining who you are isn't a modern thing!

And what do you know, it was the people oppressing homosexuals who decided this, not the big, bad """ess jay dubbo ewes""".

Cute.
I have genetic conditions that have had nothing to do with my behavior.

I didn't imply lesbians were ever persecuted (though they were in some places).

I was responding to people using laughingAnimeGirl.jpg as an argument, on one hand, and implying "Lesbians are useless" on the other, neither of which had anything to do with the original discussion I was trying to have.

Your point is correct, otherwise, but again, completely unrelated to what I was discussing

>Cute.
pic

>I have genetic conditions that have had nothing to do with my behavior.
it certainly influences your crying
I've no reason to since my life isn't /r9k/ like your own

>IThinkIKnowWhatYouLookLikeLolArentIFunny.jpg
>My life is different than yours so im better lol

>The only reason you avoid crying is to appear like TUFF STUFF in front of other insecure men who want to avoid crying to appear like TUFF STUFF.... etc.
I wonder who made this statement
>Cute.
sounds like something the picture I posted would type, very snarky and snide which probably means whatever shitty disease you have isn't the only reason you act like such a bitch

Corrective rape.

Also "standard" rape because some men just don't understand that a lesbian won't want to fuck them, no matter how hard they try. Forbidden fruit and all that jazz.

Not that that doesn't happen to straight women, but with lesbians ALL male advances are unwanted as opposed to just some, so the frequency of unwanted advances are far more likely due to males being the culturally accepted sexual initiators.

I want tumblr to leave

Well that's why I made it clear I wasn't any of those two guys, I was just interested and the quoted posts were related enough to start the conversation.

That doesn't look like homophobic behaviour at all though. Just classic sexism. The second two lines, I mean, I don't know what the fuck corrective rape is supposed to be.

Nigger just because I used the word rape doesn't mean I'm from tumblr.

Corrective rape is mostly an issue in developing countries, but the prevailing idea behind it is that lesbians can be turned straight by men having sex with them. And since they don't like men having sex with them, it ends up just being rape. This is an idea held by some people in the first world too, believing that some lesbians just haven't found the "right" man yet, although obviously very few take the idea to rape-levels of enthusiasm.

And a lot of feelings behind homophobia are somewhat rooted in sexism. For lesbians it's largely built upon the idea that a women isn't recognizing her role as the submissive sex by rejecting male advances, meanwhile the gay man is actively giving up his status as the dominant sex by accepting male advances. The latter is seen as more egregious largely because of the more dominant role males play in society, and it can be seen as weakness, which is inherently loathsome by many. Also the unsanitary implications of anal sex don't help.

This idea was even held in ancient Greece concerning homosexuality/pederasty where the submissive man wasn't even seen as a real man (hence why it was mostly only acceptable to do with adolescent boys) and the dominant man was asserting his manliness moreso than he would be by having sex with a woman, since he was dominating another man.

You can tell the reactionaries fuckwits on this board because
>They always claim to know
>What you look like
>What sites you browse
>What boards you browse
>What you do with your free time
>What kind of hat you wear
>How much hair you have on your neck

Actual arguments are either nonexistent or weak. They will sometimes appear to have won an argument by misinterpreting what you're saying or misremembering the order of posts.

Here's an important difference between us.

I assume nothing about you, except what you've already said.

You claim to know plenty about me, my gender, what kind of hats I wear, how fat I am, how pale I am, in spite of having no evidence for these things.

And you actually think such things have bearing on the argument.

>What do you say about straight men who have anal sex with straight women?
Gross, and an insult to human dignity. The fact that it doesn't help spread STDs as badly as promiscuous man-on-man anal action doesn't make it any less degenerate.

>Or about the romantic attraction between the same sex in lieu of the sexual attraction?
It is an inherently disordered attraction. Romantic feelings are meant to strengthen marital bonding, with the ultimate teleological end of reproduction. Platonic bromance should be promoted, but faggotry should be socially discouraged with bullying and beatings if necessary.

>Gross, and an insult to human dignity.
Do you hold the same notion for all forms of sexual gratification outside that meant for reproduction? Also, since you can't spread an STD if you don't have it, do you object to anal sex between two men if neither of them have STDs?

>degenerate
Define this please.

>It is an inherently disordered attraction.
Can you elaborate on this? Do you mean it's illogical since it doesn't lead to reproduction?

>Romantic feelings are meant to strengthen marital bonding
Marriage is a societal institution, so I'm gonna assume you just mean traditional pair bonding.

If gays are undesireables, surely their lack of ability to reproduce would be a good thing rather than bad, as it prevents them from passing down their supposed undesireable genes that you dislike. If it's the fact that they can't reproduce that is itself undesireable, what do you think about straight impotent people or contraceptives? Is procreation the only purpose that sex should ever be performed for? What if straight sex doesn't lead to procreation?

>Platonic bromance should be promoted, but faggotry should be socially discouraged
So intimate emotional male bonds are good, unless they have sex, which is arguably the most intimate thing you can do with another person. Why?

You have a very sex-centric view of homosexuals and people in general. Are you aware that there are in fact many times where people aren't having sex?

What a qt