As usual, you don't ask why I make an outlandish statement.
And you assume equivalence.
A straight man need not hate sleeping with men to prove he is straight.
Men and women are generally biologically biased to mating with each other.
My definition of a true lesbian implies that such a bias does not exist for said female to any extent.
at any rate your opinion is garbage
-if anything the fact that society expects and coaxes women into forming relationships with men means that women who against the odds choose to never have sex with men are authentically homo while men who get their dicks moist in a pussy are just following the biological meme
>>Long before societies even formed women felt compelled to sleep with men, even biologically for procreation purposes.
Hence, your cited phrase is garbage.
-at any rate your opinion is garbage
>>Your purported sex politics and your fake lesbianism is garbage. Your behaviour is highly bisexual, and you are unable to admit you feel a tinge of misandry probably due to your father leaving your Mom.
Also, rather than figure out how to regain access to spinster and pick up chicks in real life (you are actually attractive), you spend time palling around with male chads, incels, and sex addicts on FSE.
What kinda lesbianism is that?
Laughable, to say the least.
@Prodigal should everyone also give cannibalism a try? Just to make sure, you know? Or abandon language and go live in cave to absolutely make sure that you indeed want to be, say, an engineer and not just missing out on wonderful natural life of a hunter gatherer?
I urge you, next time you mean to say god, to not say biology. Also, if you will, do actually study biology, employing the scientific method and not mythology.
No I don't mean god.
I mean biology, or nature.
There are pheremones for attraction.
There are hormonal changes in a man or woman that prepare their bodies for heterosexual inclinations and their consequences e.g. sex acts and pregnancies.
There is clear biological evidence that the sex organs of men and women are designed to interact with each other as complements, as opposed to like organs between members of the same sex.
Whether one believes in a god or not, there is clear evidence in natures design that heterosexuality is the default.
-------
So, your analogy is broken due to your own biases on sexuality, or to supporting Georgia.
-------
To make this super simple for you and those aligned to your opinion.
E.g.
1. Georgia is born.
2. Georgia learns to walk, but then wants to move faster.
3. Georgia hops everywhere...
"Hey Georgia, why do you hop?"
Georgia: I was born this way, phuqq off!!!
4. Ayo Georgia, have you ever tried RUNNING???
-----
There is clear musculoskeletal evidence that humans are "designed" by nature to run.
Now, she can make her choice and hop all she wants, it's her choice.
But it's not a fully informed choice if she doesn't give running a try.
You don't even need biology to show that heterosexuality is default, so your entire wall of text here is rather pointless.
My main point you are not even trying to address. Too spooked that I called you godly? By your own logic I can claim that we are also designed to eat our corpses and live in caves. How is heterosexuality any different? However it is, it has nothing to do with the science that is biology.
Your continued rhetoric of evidence of "natural design" shows that you have never studied the science, you only studied the mythos. I don't know what your beliefs are, or what you have previously described them as, I'm going off of this thread alone.
As to your analogy, you are not telling a hopper to run. We are not talking about any sort of objective results. Georgia never claimed she can get someone pregnant. We are talking about subjective experiences. You are suggesting a lefty to try using only their right hand for a couple of years and see if they are still a lefty.
#NSFW
You don't even need biology to show that heterosexuality is default, so your entire wall of text here is rather pointless.
>Yet I chose it, my choice. At least we agree heterosexuality is default. Based 👍.
My main point you are not even trying to address. Too spooked that I called you godly?
>No, it's just too convenient an exit for those who are anti-god/religion.
By your own logic I can claim that we are also designed to eat our corpses and live in caves.
>Not really. We need sunlight for vitamin D production and we can eat fungus and meat but we are actually frugivores.
How is heterosexuality any different?
>Because it is the main and most popular choice, and only practical one for the procreation of humans. Clearly nature favours it.
However it is, it has nothing to do with the science that is biology.
>OK Georgia white knight, hit me wit da science.
Your continued rhetoric of evidence of "natural design" shows that you have never studied the science, you only studied the mythos.
>One, my rhetoric does nothing of the kind.
>Two, I graduated from Engineering Science and I was a member of the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers before I became an IT consultant.
I don't know what your beliefs are, or what you have previously described them as, I'm going off of this thread alone.
>Sure, that's fair.
As to your analogy, you are not telling a hopper to run.
>In my analogy I suggest that the hopper tries running before dismissing it completely as not their preference to moving faster than walking.
>Earlier in the thread, I asserted a "true" lesbian, not one influenced by peer pressure, negative experiences of men, or LGBT politics, would be one that had sex with men and found it sexually distasteful. I sad that because, as even you alluded to it earlier, heterosexuality is a natural default.
We are not talking about any sort of objective results.
>Maybe you are not, but I am.
Georgia never claimed she can get someone pregnant.
>I have no idea why you said this.
We are talking about subjective experiences.
>No, just objective.
>Can Georgia experience a sex act with a male, like it, amd find herself long for a similar sexual interaction with males in the future? If he despises the act and never longs for sex acts with males ever, then by all means she is a true lesbian, and heterosexual defaults do not apply to her.
> If on the other had she likes it somewhat, then she is not fully lesbian. Maybe for instance she gets off on dominating men, using them as slaves while she focuses on a female partner, as an example. In this case lesbianism would be her preferred fetish on her spectrum of fetishes.
You are suggesting a lefty to try using only their right hand for a couple of years and see if they are still a lefty.
>No, I am not.
>Right handedness is not a default, it is a majority default for many people. No one knows their handedness until they try to handle something
>To make you understand with a modifiied version of your analogy:
>> -Georgia is asserting that she prefers to use her left hand.
- I assert, "I dunno, guitars, guns, so many things are built for righthanded people".
-Georgia insists she is lefthanded.
-I counter and say: Georgia, you never even friggin used your left hand before!!!
-Georgia says: well I know what's in my heart!!
But, when I observe her behaviour I see hints that this may not be entirely true. Maybe she has not caught a ball or written a word before, but there are the little things like blocking the sunlight with her right hand, and shooing a fly with her left hand, that lead me to surmise that she maybe ambidextrous, though left-preferenced.
-------
Similarly, I note behaviours on & off timeline for Georgia to make me think that she is "ambisexual", though female preferenced.
That is my assertion, I think she is les-leaning bi, but only a definitive action, like a sex act, may confirm this, seeing heterosexuality is nature's default and nature is biayses toward this.
It was your choice and it was a bad choice. You just cited random passages from your gospel of biology, and proved nothing. Meanwhile what you were trying to prove is common sense.
- got spooked?
- no I just thought the anti-godders are out to cancel me again! <.<
so you did get spooked? I was actually expecting you to come at me with atheism, or some proper fedi stuff like pyromancy. Somewhat dissappointing.
- we need vitamin D
Now, look, I get it you don't get out much, but that doesn't mean cave people don't. They do. They might not have a language, but they have a life.
- we love frutieees
yea sure, you'd prefer an apple to a human corpse, but if the corpse happened to be more affordable, you'd go for the corpse, right?
"Because it is the main and most popular choice, and only practical one for the procreation of humans."
Not a biological argument regarding an individual. I have to reiterate and urge you to think this time. If your argument is scientific, than I'm asking you by the same argument, how did you know you wanted to be an engineer and not a caveman? Should you not have tried to be caveman for a couple of years before making such an important decision?
- hit me wit da science.
I don't need biology to tell you what is not biology. What are you even asking? See above on why your argument has nothing to do with biology as science.
- you did not study biology as science, you studied it as mythos.
- but I graduateeed ToT
When arguments run out, titles are thrown around. And what glorious titles: "I failed at being an engineer, so I went into snake oil business instead".
"We are not talking about any sort of objective results.
>Maybe you are not, but I am."
The objective result of another person being satisfied? Now I must urge you to study language?
">Right handedness is not a default, it is a majority default"
It's not a default it's just a default? How about we translate this:
Right handedness is not the word of god, it's just biological default.
"-I counter and say: Georgia, you never even friggin used your left hand before!!!"
Assuming you meant to write "right" here, I'm afraid this is thoroughly fucked up my firend.
No offence to Georgia, but I don't care what her orientation is. I'm in this thread cause you decided to pretend to be a scientist and that triggered me. Now I'm also discovering that you are a total creep.
@Prodigal I literally told you I don't care who you are, or are classified as, or what you think of whom or what you believe. I'm only pointing out your BS in this thread specifically. Try reading again maybe. If you can't see through the banter it is you who are overly fixated on yourself, not me.
@orekix @allison @georgia
Don't have the time to dispute your bs line by line.
Let's agree to disagree because you started of strong when you had poor assumptions and then devolved into drivel once I started countering you line by line.
If you don't like me or what I said fine I get it I can be an asshole 8 days a week.
But please don't pretend you had intellectual points or that you weren't moving goalposts.
Nice talking to you, have a nice life.