Being gay isn't normal...

There are several advantages conferred by homosexual behavior. Even Wikipedia describes these at length.

>this is where the "Why the homophobia?" shiposter has taken us

>Being gay isn't normal.

Duh. Also why the fuck are you posting here? The only people who deny reality are on >Should homosexuality occurring in nature mean nothing in the face of this statement because

...because cancer and illness occurs in nature as well.

Being a shitposter isn't normal. Should shitpostism occurring in nature mean nothing in the face of this statement because 4chanimals are mindless and therefore shouldn't be taken as a reference, or does it disprove it because of the same reason i.e. that 4chanimals, who operate on instinct, engage in it and therefore the occurrence of it in humans is also completely natural? If it were natural and not an aberration then why do only a minority of people experience it? Any logical line of reasoning will lead to the conclusion that it's not supposed to happen. Is there any more evidence supporting either of these arguments?

>Any logical line of reasoning will lead to the conclusion that it's not supposed to happen
that doesn't prove that it is bad.
>But why would homosexuality be a trait providing more fitness, since its sufferers most likely won't have children? It makes much more sense that homosexuality is a disorder/disease.
we usually don't call it a disorder or disease because it doesn't cause any harm to the person affected with it nor does it cause any direct harm to the people around them. For most people when something is diagnosed as disorder they think that since it's a disorder it has to be bad.

If the homosexuality rate was comparable to the shitposting rate, this would be the last generation.

lmao

fmao

Human population is controled by suicides and homosexuality.

Will the naturalistic fallacy ever fall out of favor with brainlets?

No, it won't.

there are two aspects of homosexuality: biological and social.
biologically, homosexuality is just a substitution and/or developed conditioned reflex. there is nothing good/wrong, because it's how organism works.

sociologically, normalization of homosexuality in society will lead to degeneration of that society and collapse.
there is a reason, why homosexuality is taboo in all cultures.

>sociologically, normalization of homosexuality in society will lead to degeneration of that society and collapse.

Can we get the part where a new high school counter culture forms? These alt-right teenagers are killing me.

remember my words when europe will become islamic caliphate in the near future.

you can think about it as natural selection. the weak civilization lose to more strong and survivable civilization.

If only a miinority of people experience X, does that automatically make X not "natural"?

>sociologically, normalization of homosexuality in society will lead to degeneration of that society and collapse.
>there is a reason, why homosexuality is taboo in all cultures.
Not a valid argument.

So any trait on the extremes of a bell curve would be "unnatural"? Makes no sense when so many "normal" things occupy those ends.

We would only need a "control" if our population were too large for our food supply. This isn't the case unless you live in some African shithole, so your argument is invalid.

Traits dont need to directly confer fitness. Might be a product of pleiotropy. Tbh its useless speculating on something like this. But the point is why is there this naturalness you seek. Its illusory. Social construction. No reason why some traits should be considered be more natural than others. Evolution doesnt work that way with goals or preferences. Thats a human thing. Disorddr is a human thing and has no consistent definition. Infact in psychiatry its only given if theres a failure to function in someones personal life. Nothing to do with fitness.

So stop with your bullshit charade and intellectual naivety.

Cunt.

westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/depths-of-madness/

>Not a valid argument.
It is valid to assume that even if homosexual civilizations existed, they all failed miserably.

The myth of sodom and gomorrah confirmed that.

Wot.

/pol/ please

There is the same logic as behind incest taboo. Maybe something happened in the past that teached our ancestors that being homo is not good.

>The myth of sodom and gomorrah confirmed that.
>The myth confirmed that.
>myth confirmed
Please try harder bibleboy.

Kek, fucking hippie, go back to your basement and go trip on cheap LSD imitations

>Recent approaches often view myths as manifestations of psychological, cultural, or societal truths
You underestimate myths. It's not just tales. It's collective memories and knowledge.

>Speaking of the depths of madness, if homosexuality is caused by a pathogen, wouldn’t it be possible to weaponize it?

TURNING THE FRIGGIN FROGS GAY

>If it were natural and not an aberration then why do only a minority of people experience it?

Great job mate. This reasoning implies that whenever anti-gay sentiments are held by only a minority of humans that means it is unnatural and an aberration to be anti-gay. So let me check my stats...

Whoops mate. For years now more than 50% of humans in the western world approve of homosexuality, which means your position is unnatural and an aberration. Sorry mate.

Who are you quoting?

Is being disgusted by homosexuality natural?

Yes, being gay isn't "normal" in the sense it isn't the most common thing.

My question is: so what?

/thread

no one is going to remember your words because you are complete fucking idiot and embody the antithesis of scientific reasoning

You know alex was actually talking about this.
newsweek.com/female-frogs-estrogen-hermaphrodites-suburban-waste-369553

He was also "talking" about the gay bomb at the same time

In the current world being gay is objectively better than straight.

shut the fuck up

AGP master race

yes

Then why is the common narrative of "homophobia" that it's a hatecrime?

There is a difference between being homophobic and acting on your homophobia in some way.

Saying you think homophobia is nasty is not a hate crime. Killing people because they are gay is a hate crime.

Where exactly did you pull that out from? You took his question and thought about it logically when in current society it IS considered a 'hate crime' to voice your negative opinions about such topics.

>having opinion is a crime

Its a matter of preference desu. And who gives a fuck anyway the more gays the more women for us straight guys am i right ?

guys like you who can't see beyond the end of nose are the most dangerous.
it's like a butterfly effect. something that beginning as simple preference can have catastrophic consequences for society.

So what do you guys think of bisexual women? From my personal experience there's a staggering fucking amount, there are even studies that claim all women are bisexual. Strange.

why can't you understand that sexual preferences is not restricted in any way? "homosexual", "bisexual" are all just social constructs.

women are more open minded because lesbianism don't have such negative image as homosexuality in most cultures.

posting animu isn't normal

Stop talking down to me. I can't specify what I'm asking about without using those "social constructs". Second, I find it really really hard to believe that the sole reason women happen to be like that is just because of the social reputation of male homosexuality. You're such a pseud. You're even treating 'lesbianism' and homosexuality as different things, what the fuck. Go back to whatever shithole you crawled out of.

Homosexuality isnt incest.

How is your question nothing but boring semantics?

If we define as natural that which is likely in nature then gays aren't very natural. Whatever

butthurt fag/10

Jordan Peterson was a mistake.

Welcome to LGBT autism, where everyone who doesn't support them is automatically an enemy

By your definition a rare animal could be deemed unnatural.

Why can I get extreme pleasure and even orgasm from being fucked in the ass as a male? What is the evolutionary purpose of that?

Serious question.

Look in the mirror fagglehorn.

Being gay is not "normal" using that definition, no. So what, though.

I can't.

This

>define "normal"
Gay people can't multiply, so their dot product is zero. This means that gay people are normal to each other

gay people are people who identifies themselves as gay. it has nothing to do with reproductive system

cute

Explain these so-called advantages

You're just saying they'll view you as an enemy. It isn't a crime. Sure a lot of people might not like that you say it but you're not going to be put in jail or tried because of it.

but have you tried?

Unless you're a hive species, at a certain point it doesn't provide any advantages to have every member trying to procreate all the time. In fact it is beneficial to have members who aren't a drain on resources and provide the rest of the pack protection from predators.

At least that's my understanding of it

It's normal for there to be gay people but gay people aren't normal in a statistical sense.

Everytime i see a question being asked and right next to it is an anime girl OP is always autistic. Litetally every time its that way..

duckduckgo.com/?q=how to read wikipedia

but are they dotards then?

Link me the the article that describes advantages with sources to back it up, because unless I am blind and/or illiterate, the article for homosexuality in no way suggests that there are significant advantages.

It isn't normal, but what are gay people supposed to do? There's no cure currently, if such a thing is possible.
>Inb4 kill themselves

This, except that's not a myth. The same thing is happening to Europe as we speak, except God's doing it with Muslims instead of fire
>Inb4 go back to /pol/
Don't browse /pol/, this is what I genuinely believe

>Gay people can't multiply
Wrong.

gay != infertile