|
Post by truthteacher2007 on Jul 23, 2014 14:54:31 GMT -5
Black homophobes and their arguments (really nothing more than baseless statements) sound just as stupid as white supremacist(just look at this discussion). Do you know anything about Zulu oral history or the countless other groups of Africans who had "boy wives" or the butch lesbians of certain West African groups? Europeans were the original homophobes who imposed it on us and even wrote lengthy text on the "rampant" homosexuality among the black peoples of what is now homophobic MUSLIM (hence non African) Senegal. The sooner that black people realize that "homoPHOBIA" is what is truly UNafrican the sooner our black family can come together to fix this ish that we're in. Stop being so divisive. Thanks for adding those details. I couldn't remember the exact group that had the tradition of boy brides, or if it was Central Africa or South Africa. The interesting thing about this is that it seemed to be temporary. Once the boy reached maturity, which is similar to several other societies around the world. In Siwa in Egypt there was also a tradition of man boy marriage. What kills me though once again, is the hypocracy. European missionaries and colonial governments went into societies all around the world, including Africa imposing sodomy laws and talking about how debased the natives were, while forgetting the notorious reputation for sodomy in English boarding schools and collages. Most of the aristocracy were educated in such facilities, which means that there first sexual experiences were with other boys they went to school with. Jump ahead to the late 20th century all these countries are now secular, they decide homosexuality is not a mental disease or a crime and now have the nerve to look at African countries and call them backward etc because they didn't get the memo. To make things worse, now they have evangelical missionaries reenforcing this Victorian nonsense. Seriously, for countries who are reeling from the aftermath of colonialism, economic exploitation and the poverty and disease resulting from it, social and political instability, you mean to tell me that they can't find more important topics to worry about than who is sleeping with whom? These are all diversionary tactics to get people all emotionally worked up and disrtacted from the real issues. While they're worried about insignificant ideas, their society is being robbed blind and widening the gap between rich and poor.
|
|
|
Post by forty2tribes on Jul 23, 2014 18:52:59 GMT -5
God maketh me to lay with women by giving me hormones that teleth me that that pussing bullet wound between a woman's legs taste like key lime pie and feels like a slice of heaven. God tells other people other things. Animals too. Some animals are just fruity as human queers. Dont blame society blame god. Besides if the histories are true only 200K slaves were brought to North America . And now there are 30 million despite the abortions. Hmmmm....
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jul 24, 2014 7:47:57 GMT -5
So it seems I am out on an island on this one. The cheese stands alone. Familiar territory for me. That said. Some of us are confusing the issues at hand. They are Is the act of penetrating another man acceptable. Based upon religious, evolutionary and socio reasons. Is it Ok to ostracizes people who participate with such behavaiour. On the first point – There is no religion that I know of that condone such behavior. And there is no evolutionary need or advantage to penetrating another man's butt. This leads me to the second point. The social agenda. Now this can be hotly debated. – This what most of you are responding to. It is more an emotional response or view than a well thought out one. I am not challenging “live and let live” view point …maybe(sic). The gay strategy is to equate their cause with the African American struggle for recognition and equal rights. It is NOT the same as the Black cause and it is NOT the same as the women’s struggle for equal pay and recognition. Homosexuality is a disease that needs to be rid of. The act is health risk. It is filthy. And it is disgusting. Anyone who does not recognized these facts are crazy. It is unhealthy, it is filthy, there is no evolutionary need. It against the laws of all known religion. There is no religion that I know of that sanction homosexual behavior. Many are being duped into believing it is the same as “race” and gender struggles in the past. It is not. It is a filthy act that sick minds participate in. And the ones in power are screwing with the numbers and media making it seem normal and “acceptable”. It is not.
What's next? Penetrating a dog will be normal. "They are not bothering you". Right!?
The sane ones like us have a social responsibility. All homosexuals I know have some kind of psychosis and baggage. They are mentally weak and disturbed. Do a Poll.
|
|
|
Post by truthteacher2007 on Jul 24, 2014 15:39:50 GMT -5
So it seems I am out on an island on this one. The cheese stands alone. Familiar territory for me. That said. Some of us are confusing the issues at hand. They are Is the act of penetrating another man acceptable. Based upon religious, evolutionary and socio reasons. Is it Ok to ostracizes people who participate with such behavaiour. On the first point – There is no religion that I know of that condone such behavior. And there is no evolutionary need or advantage to penetrating another man's butt. This leads me to the second point. The social agenda. Now this can be hotly debated. – This what most of you are responding to. It is more an emotional response or view than a well thought out one. I am not challenging “live and let live” view point …maybe(sic). The gay strategy is to equate their cause with the African American struggle for recognition and equal rights. It is NOT the same as the Black cause and it is NOT the same as the women’s struggle for equal pay and recognition. Homosexuality is a disease that needs to be rid of. The act is health risk. It is filthy. And it is disgusting. Anyone who does not recognized these facts are crazy. It is unhealthy, it is filthy, there is no evolutionary need. It against the laws of all known religion. There is no religion that I know of that sanction homosexual behavior. Many are being duped into believing it is the same as “race” and gender struggles in the past. It is not. It is a filthy act that sick minds participate in. And the ones in power are screwing with the numbers and media making it seem normal and “acceptable”. It is not. What's next? Penetrating a dog will be normal. "They are not bothering you". Right!? The sane ones like us have a social responsibility. All homosexuals I know have some kind of psychosis and baggage. They are mentally weak and disturbed. Do a Poll. Were you sexually molested as a child? Your point of view is so..... well.... All I can say is hypocritical. You yourself are not religious, nor do you want your sexual activities to be held accountable to religious doctrines, yet you find justification to do it to others. Let me ask you a question. What religious doctrine do you know of that condones sexual activity outside of marriage? According to the Bible, you and the homosexual are both on the same level. You are a fornicator by your own admission and therefore, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven and shal be consigned to hell fire. So if both you and the homosexual are going to the same hell, what difference does it make how you get there? I'm sorry, but I find your point of view juvenile, reactionary and hypocritical. What is disgusting? Is eating pussy disgusting? Is screwing a woman up the butt disgusting? Are blow jobs disgusting? How about masterbation? You talk so much about reproduction. You can't tell me you never got your dick sucked at least once in your life. I guessthe seamen traveled from her stomach to her uterus to provide the evolutionary continuation you speak so much of. And I'm sure every time you beat off you save that in a jar under your bed to be used at a later date. Filthy? Well I guess you never screwed a woman when she had her period. Some people consider a woman on her period to be filthy. I guess we should all shun menstruating women. Health risk. I guess you never heard of crabs, ghonorhea, herpes, syphylis, vanerial warts, hepatitis. No, no health risks associated with heterosexua sex. I guess you're also unaware of the fact that in Africa AIDS is spread by heterosexual contact with prostitutes. All casual sexual activity carries health risks, grow up already! Who are you to judge what anyone does in their own bedrooms? This morning I saw a movie about the career of Betty Page. Back in the 50's the government had laws on the books preventing men from buying magazines that showed women in fetish wear, bondage, spanking. I don't know about you, but I don't want anyone policing how I choose to bust a nut. You know what makes people mentally unstable? When you shame someone about their sexuality and force them to hide it, that's when they become neurotic and express their desires in unhealthy ways. After almost 50yrs on this earth, it's been my experience that people who get all worked up about other people's sex lives are usually hiding some really deep hangups themselves. So seriously dude. What's your deal? You like to be tied up and spanked with a rolled up news paper and called a bad puppy? Unless someone's trying to shuve something up your butt why do you care? Actually, that might not be such a bad idea. Maybe if you got your salad tossed you'd relieve some of that pent up stress. Honestly, I find this thread and the logic expressed in it to be.... Well, you know. I don't think I have to come right out and say it. Just some more irrelivant nonsense to distract black people from the really important things we need to be worrying about. Honestly, if people like you put as much energy in speaking out about substandard education of our youth, drug trafficing and gang activity in our neighborhods, we'd be so much farther ahead then we are now. But taking a stand on those things actually requires effort doesn't it? So much easy to just get emotionally riled up about things that don't actually effect anyones lives. Unless maybe butt sex is responsable for all that ailes the black community.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jul 24, 2014 19:08:56 GMT -5
You told me off....I am going to give it a rest.
You got me on the oral part. Yeah. I love good hd .....from a woman. But no butt thingy. Why? Same reason sex with a man is wrong. Although I don't consider oral with a woman filthy. Penetrating in feces is filthy and unhealthy. Most would agree. The butt wasn't designed to receive sperm. Sorry! I don't like the idea of e-coli on my dk.
But I will give it a rest.
Let's move on to Africana.....
|
|
|
Post by forty2tribes on Jul 24, 2014 19:21:53 GMT -5
So it seems I am out on an island on this one. The cheese stands alone. Familiar territory for me. That said. Some of us are confusing the issues at hand. They are Is the act of penetrating another man acceptable. Based upon religious, evolutionary and socio reasons. Is it Ok to ostracizes people who participate with such behavaiour. On the first point – There is no religion that I know of that condone such behavior. And there is no evolutionary need or advantage to penetrating another man's butt. This leads me to the second point. The social agenda. Now this can be hotly debated. – This what most of you are responding to. It is more an emotional response or view than a well thought out one. I am not challenging “live and let live” view point …maybe(sic). The gay strategy is to equate their cause with the African American struggle for recognition and equal rights. It is NOT the same as the Black cause and it is NOT the same as the women’s struggle for equal pay and recognition. Homosexuality is a disease that needs to be rid of. The act is health risk. It is filthy. And it is disgusting. Anyone who does not recognized these facts are crazy. It is unhealthy, it is filthy, there is no evolutionary need. It against the laws of all known religion. There is no religion that I know of that sanction homosexual behavior. Many are being duped into believing it is the same as “race” and gender struggles in the past. It is not. It is a filthy act that sick minds participate in. And the ones in power are screwing with the numbers and media making it seem normal and “acceptable”. It is not. What's next? Penetrating a dog will be normal. "They are not bothering you". Right!? The sane ones like us have a social responsibility. All homosexuals I know have some kind of psychosis and baggage. They are mentally weak and disturbed. Do a Poll. You arent entirely alone. I'm not sure if there is a real increase in homosexuality. I simply dont see it but I do know that the USA didnt hide their work on a 'gay' bomb'. Iow there is social engineering at work. I'm just not sold on the idea that emasculation will cause men who love the female body to venture. If the powers that be are really interested in increasing the percentage of gay men they will use more nefarious tactics than legalizing gay marriage and ignoring Spartacus's love scenes.
|
|
|
Post by anansi on Jul 24, 2014 21:59:18 GMT -5
Lemme lighten the thread a lil but still on topic.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jul 25, 2014 4:27:24 GMT -5
really funny. ues. lighten it up.
|
|
|
Post by truthteacher2007 on Jul 25, 2014 9:02:03 GMT -5
You told me off....I am going to give it a rest. You got me on the oral part. Yeah. I love good hd .....from a woman. But no butt thingy. Why? Same reason sex with a man is wrong. Although I don't consider oral with a woman filthy. Penetrating in feces is filthy and unhealthy. Most would agree. The butt wasn't designed to receive sperm. Sorry! I don't like the idea of e-coli on my dk. But I will give it a rest. Let's move on to Africana..... It really isn't my intention to insult you, honestly. I'm just opening your eyes to certain things. I'm not even trying to tell you you have to be cool with it. What I am saying, is that it is just a part of the world we live in and always has been. This fear mongeringabout it from evangelicals and right wingers is a diversionary tactic to distract people from the things that are really important. Two consenting adults having sex in whatever way they want to doesn't effect our lives. They've always been there, they will always be there and the world will continue just as it always has. What is affectig our lives? The stealthy errosion of our rights, our economy, the endless wars we keep getting draged into. The escalating mess happening in the Middle East that WE caused. These are the things that are and will have very serious consequences on our lives. I do agree with you that there are agendas. Agendas to turn the clock back on the quality of life advances we've made in the last century. Don't you find it just a little bit suspicious that all these ministers and politicians who are rabbid homophobes eventually get caught with their pants down with another guy? The ruling elite always comes up with rules for the rabble while they do whatever the hell they want with whomever they want. King James who comissioned the Bible was notorious for his affairs with the boys at court. Back in the Middle Ages and Renaisance the Popes, who were supposed to be celibate, reveled in orgies of all kinds and even today a great deal of the heads of the Catholic church all the way to the Vatican are gay. They're picking up guys at discos on Saturday and performing mass on Sunday. There is a documentary out about it called secrates of the Vatican. So what is going on? We get told well go to hell, we're sick etc if we do ABC, meanwhile they're doing that and worse. It's all about social control through emotional manipulation through guilt and fear. Just consider that these types of witch hunts cause people to loose their lives . I think Anansi posted a video of the squalid conditions transgender and gays, effeinate and masculine have to live in. Young men, teenagers abandoned by their familiesand forced to live on the streets, sleeping in sewers and selling their bodies to survive. No matter what I may feel about who they ae, no human being deserves to live like this. Even murderers are given a clean place to sleep and 3 meals a day. It's wrong. I feel more insulted personally with the blatant sexuality that is being pushed in people's faces in general. The fact that I can't take some kids to the park for a picknick without seeing couples rolling around between each other's legs actually simulating sex. There's just a basic lack of morality across the board. Cetain things should be respected and kept private. I don't care to see gays flaunting their wares down the street and I don't care to see straight men or women doing it either.. But you see, it was exactly this one sided flauting of manners and propriety in the late 60's by heterosexuals, free love, let it all hang out, that is responsable for the way homosexuality is being pushed in everyone's faces. It's just human nature that if one group sees another group getting away with something, they'll want to do the same and that's exactly what we have now. I'm all for toning it down and having personal self respect and dignity. I don't find the way sexuality is expressed in our society today to be dignified. I find it animalistic, objectifyingand devoid of love or spirituality. But to tell people they are wrong and sick for having their basic attractions? It's the backlash of years of Puritanical and Victorian guilt and shame around sex that has lead us to where we are now. Nothing good ever comes out of pursecuting people and humiliating them.
|
|
|
Post by forty2tribes on Jul 25, 2014 12:59:11 GMT -5
^^ Agreed this is why I prefer a more liberal approach to the basics. A society that tolerates or ignores men who marry men is stronger than one where homosexuals are stoned, assaulted and burned alive. Also why is marijuana illegal all throughout Africa while people smoke a grade called Kush everywhere? Isnt it about time Kush grows the world’s Kush?
|
|
|
Post by Tukuler al~Takruri on Jul 27, 2014 22:52:39 GMT -5
^^ Agreed this is why I prefer a more liberal approach to the basics. A society that tolerates or ignores men who marry men is stronger than one where homosexuals are stoned, assaulted and burned alive. Also why is marijuana illegal all throughout Africa while people smoke a grade called Kush everywhere? Isnt it about time Kush grows the world’s Kush? Well I'd prefer a return to natural herbs like Lambsbread or Thai stick or Kona Bud or Texas Brown or Panama Red or even good old Yard Sensi to these new Euro biology designed cannabis offerings currently on the market.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jul 28, 2014 12:12:00 GMT -5
Old school...cully
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jul 28, 2014 12:19:17 GMT -5
It just hit me. man-man sex is ok. But same sex marriage is not? Just curious, tic tic
With these sanctioned man-boy relationship.... In African societies (sic).
So is it love or just deviate sexual behavior? Maybe man-man marriage should be welcome then these people would die out.
It sounds like the argument is penetrating a "boy" besides being a sick pedophille, serves a temporary need because no female is around due to incarceration or war expeditions.
Sounds like a deprave behavior if females are around
|
|
|
Post by truthteacher2007 on Jul 29, 2014 12:10:15 GMT -5
It just hit me. man-man sex is ok. But same sex marriage is not? Just curious, tic tic With these sanctioned man-boy relationship.... In African societies (sic). So is it love or just deviate sexual behavior? Maybe man-man marriage should be welcome then these people would die out. It sounds like the argument is penetrating a "boy" besides being a sick pedophille, serves a temporary need because no female is around due to incarceration or war expeditions. Sounds like a deprave behavior if females are around It will never die out because it is a natural part of the diversity of life exptession on the planet. It takes 2 heterosexuals to make 1 homosexual. The reason you can't understand this is because you are trapped by the constrainst of your world view. No big deal, most of are prisoners of our own perspectives. There is no one reality in the world. We live in a multiplicity of realities, or points of view, each as real to the observer as the other. In our society we view the world from the perspective of heterosexual and homosexual. You're either one or the other. This is not a universal truth, it's a social construct. In other places and times, sexuality was viewd differently. People say the world from the perspective of male/female. Men penetrate, women get penetrated. Therefore, as long as one takes the active role in sex, penetrator, he is a man. One who is penetrated is less than a man. This is probably why boys and young men were allowed. Boys and teenagers were not considered men. They were male, but not full men, therefore, their status was below that of a man. They were naturally subserviant. Once they reached the age of adulthood, they were men and were expected to act as men and that meant, getting married and having children. Another difference is that in our society there is the expectation of love in marriage, which carries the obligation, or expectation of fidelity. In the past and in many societies marriage has nothing to do with love. It's a social obligation to one's family. You get married to perpetuate the family line and pass on your wealth to the next generation. A woman gets married to have someone take care of her. In exchange she takes care of the home and provides children, preferably male to continue the family line. People didn't choose their spouses, the family did. Your parents would look for a sutable mate. So for a woman, the parents look for someone who above all, could be a good provider, then they considered his character. For a man, his family looked for a woman who was of good character, from a good family, many times one who could pay them a good dowery. She should also be healthy, a good cook etc. Oh yeah, she better be a virgin! Only a woman was expected to be faithful in marriage. Why? No man wants to pass his wealth on to another man's child. A woman was a man's property. Having another ma sleep with your wife means you were weak and unable to protect your property. A man on the other had was free to do whatever the hell he pleased. Sex was a man's right and a way that he showed his power and dominion. If he felt like sticking it in a prostitute, another man who would let him or a boy or teenager, that was fine because he was in the positio of strength exercising his power. This is why in war, the captives were often raped. To rape an enemy soldier was to show you were victorious and stronger, more manly than they were. Ever wonder why we tell other men fuck you and suck my dick? It goes back to those times when sex was often used as a way of humiliating your enemy. To be a man who allowed himself to be penetrated.... Let's just say you never wanted to admit to that or get caught. That was a disgrace. The only way you could restore your honor was to prove you could function in the male role in sex. Here's the other thing that didn't exist back then, a concept exclucivity in sexual desire. We think that if a man is attracted to other males it automatically means he is incapable of being sexually attracted to the opposite sex. In the ancient world, no one thought that way. There was no equivalent of a gay identity. This is why even thogh a man had a taste for male sex, (as long as he was the top), no one thought anything about it. He was still expected to get married. No one would have been able to understand that a man refused to get married just because he liked to screw dudes. That would have made as much sense to them as someone saying they can't eat apples because they love to eat oranges. It was just a different flavor. No one's self identity was tied into their sexual preference. Sexwas something you did, not what or who you were. So even a passive homosexual could change in the eyes of society if he stopped allowing himself to be penetrated and took the active sex role, got a wife and had kids. By doing so, he proved his manhood. The idea of sexuality being set in stone that we have didn't exist. Here's something else to consider, changing economy and technology. In ancient times when survival was based on hunting and agriculture, it was neccessary to have very defined gender roles. Women had children, therefore they took care of the home. Men had superior physical strength, they hunted, farmed etc. These activities were dependent on having children to help with the work. Today, our economies are more based on technology and industry. The roles of women have changed. They don't have to be limited to the home. A woman can take care of herself now, she doesn't need a man. With the decline of religion, a shift to a secular society, more social equality, men also have options that didn't exist before. If he doesn't want to get married, he doesn't have to. Furthermore, because women are more independent, they expect more. Adultery is unacceptable. Whereas in the past, she was expected to shut up and ignore it, now she can sue for divorce. She expects not only fidelity, but love. Men also expect to have love in marriage. Therefore, for men who are attracted to other men, the idea of marrying someone you don't love, is unacceptable. Our hormones as humans are one thing, how we organize our societies and the rules we come up with to do it are something else. We are reinventing the wheel all the time. What we do and how we do it changes as the needs of our societies change. We are on the cusp of one of those periods of changing circumstances and expectations. I'm old enough to remember when a woman wearing pants, wanting to run a marathon or go to a gym was a big deal. A man pushing a baby carriage, wearing a pink shirt, taking care of the kids, UNHEARED OF! The only certainty in human existance is change.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Jul 29, 2014 14:20:25 GMT -5
No disrespect but..,,, Whatever makes or justify penetrating men. Convince yourself. As for African society of old. I am not knowledgable enough to confirm or disconfirm. So I will leave it at that. Maybe the brothas in the know may have something to contribute. [uote author=" truthteacher2007" source="/post/10447/thread" timestamp="1406653815"] It just hit me. man-man sex is ok. But same sex marriage is not? Just curious, tic tic With these sanctioned man-boy relationship.... In African societies (sic). So is it love or just deviate sexual behavior? Maybe man-man marriage should be welcome then these people would die out. It sounds like the argument is penetrating a "boy" besides being a sick pedophille, serves a temporary need because no female is around due to incarceration or war expeditions. Sounds like a deprave behavior if females are around It will never die out because it is a natural part of the diversity of life exptession on the planet. It takes 2 heterosexuals to make 1 homosexual. The reason you can't understand this is because you are trapped by the constrainst of your world view. No big deal, most of are prisoners of our own perspectives. There is no one reality in the world. We live in a multiplicity of realities, or points of view, each as real to the observer as the other. In our society we view the world from the perspective of heterosexual and homosexual. You're either one or the other. This is not a universal truth, it's a social construct. In other places and times, sexuality was viewd differently. People say the world from the perspective of male/female. Men penetrate, women get penetrated. Therefore, as long as one takes the active role in sex, penetrator, he is a man. One who is penetrated is less than a man. This is probably why boys and young men were allowed. Boys and teenagers were not considered men. They were male, but not full men, therefore, their status was below that of a man. They were naturally subserviant. Once they reached the age of adulthood, they were men and were expected to act as men and that meant, getting married and having children. Another difference is that in our society there is the expectation of love in marriage, which carries the obligation, or expectation of fidelity. In the past and in many societies marriage has nothing to do with love. It's a social obligation to one's family. You get married to perpetuate the family line and pass on your wealth to the next generation. A woman gets married to have someone take care of her. In exchange she takes care of the home and provides children, preferably male to continue the family line. People didn't choose their spouses, the family did. Your parents would look for a sutable mate. So for a woman, the parents look for someone who above all, could be a good provider, then they considered his character. For a man, his family looked for a woman who was of good character, from a good family, many times one who could pay them a good dowery. She should also be healthy, a good cook etc. Oh yeah, she better be a virgin! Only a woman was expected to be faithful in marriage. Why? No man wants to pass his wealth on to another man's child. A woman was a man's property. Having another ma sleep with your wife means you were weak and unable to protect your property. A man on the other had was free to do whatever the hell he pleased. Sex was a man's right and a way that he showed his power and dominion. If he felt like sticking it in a prostitute, another man who would let him or a boy or teenager, that was fine because he was in the positio of strength exercising his power. This is why in war, the captives were often raped. To rape an enemy soldier was to show you were victorious and stronger, more manly than they were. Ever wonder why we tell other men you and suck my dick? It goes back to those times when sex was often used as a way of humiliating your enemy. To be a man who allowed himself to be penetrated.... Let's just say you never wanted to admit to that or get caught. That was a disgrace. The only way you could restore your honor was to prove you could function in the male role in sex. Here's the other thing that didn't exist back then, a concept exclucivity in sexual desire. We think that if a man is attracted to other males it automatically means he is incapable of being sexually attracted to the opposite sex. In the ancient world, no one thought that way. There was no equivalent of a gay identity. This is why even thogh a man had a taste for male sex, (as long as he was the top), no one thought anything about it. He was still expected to get married. No one would have been able to understand that a man refused to get married just because he liked to screw dudes. That would have made as much sense to them as someone saying they can't eat apples because they love to eat oranges. It was just a different flavor. No one's self identity was tied into their sexual preference. Sexwas something you did, not what or who you were. So even a passive homosexual could change in the eyes of society if he stopped allowing himself to be penetrated and took the active sex role, got a wife and had kids. By doing so, he proved his manhood. The idea of sexuality being set in stone that we have didn't exist. Here's something else to consider, changing economy and technology. In ancient times when survival was based on hunting and agriculture, it was neccessary to have very defined gender roles. Women had children, therefore they took care of the home. Men had superior physical strength, they hunted, farmed etc. These activities were dependent on having children to help with the work. Today, our economies are more based on technology and industry. The roles of women have changed. They don't have to be limited to the home. A woman can take care of herself now, she doesn't need a man. With the decline of religion, a shift to a secular society, more social equality, men also have options that didn't exist before. If he doesn't want to get married, he doesn't have to. Furthermore, because women are more independent, they expect more. Adultery is unacceptable. Whereas in the past, she was expected to shut up and ignore it, now she can sue for divorce. She expects not only fidelity, but love. Men also expect to have love in marriage. Therefore, for men who are attracted to other men, the idea of marrying someone you don't love, is unacceptable. Our hormones as humans are one thing, how we organize our societies and the rules we come up with to do it are something else. We are reinventing the wheel all the time. What we do and how we do it changes as the needs of our societies change. We are on the cusp of one of those periods of changing circumstances and expectations. I'm old enough to remember when a woman wearing pants, wanting to run a marathon or go to a gym was a big deal. A man pushing a baby carriage, wearing a pink shirt, taking care of the kids, UNHEARED OF! The only certainty in human existance is change.[/quote]
|
|