Numark
-
Posts
1,314 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Numark
-
-
You don't want Jauronimo exposing himself...
Not that there is anything wrong with that
-
Numark =
Nice try, but you openly mocked a man for his traditional beliefs on sex. What you were doing was mocking his religious approach to sex. You know it and I know it, and that’s why your participation in this thread has only been marginalized by you with your own words. You claim to be oh so super-duper tolerant but you’re not really..
Tim-
Ryan –
I hope so, I have work to do. J
Tim-
You have a reading comprehension problem. Get it checked out.
I actually said the opposite of what you said I claimed. None of this has to do with religion, even though I would mock an intolerant part of a religion (human rights > a quote from an book).
-
Numark –
How very tolerant of you, making fun of his predilection for decency as he sees it. You guys always expose yourselves eventually. In any regard, I have a question for you, another poster that fails to actually answer them when asked, instead choosing something else to respond with, however, why do you suppose sex feels good? Any ideas? Just curious?
Tim-
I already said I'm not very tolerant of bigots, racists, etc. I'm okay with that.
-
Which is dead last on the list of reasons why I have sex.
Hahaha. You mean you don't plan on having sex only a few times in your life to reproduce? You know.... lights off, clothes on, missionary, crying?
Or am I all alone?
-
And there is the modern societal problem. There is no line of any kind.
No I just don't know what you are referring to. In what situation are you talking about needing to draw a line?
-
IMO, not really. It has always been my stance. You want that societal line just pushed far enough that it benefits what you feel is important and then have it stop. Where are the limits? You've expressed belief in a society that appears to have no limits. Just an unlimitless ability to make oneself feel that they can be themselves. IMO, that is a dangerous, open ended road to go down. A road that cares only about oneself and doesn't think of others in society.
How about humans? That's an easy line to draw. Marrying another human is the line
-
I understand that. But, where do you draw the line?
What line
-
i want that child to be healthy and happy.
Wouldn't you rather care if your son may kiss a boy one day!!!! Ewwww ick gross!!!!!!
-
Let me ask you this one question. If you had a first born child on the way would you want him to be gay?
I think most non-homophobes like myself wouldn't care.
Just like most non-racists wouldn't care if their son married someone of another race.
Thankfully society matures and people behind the curve like yourself are becoming less common as each generation gets better and better. I'm not a tolerant person. I don't tolerate what I think is wrong, such as racist or bigots. And society doesn't either as society only tolerates what is the social norm. This often works for the worse such as when racism was common and people tolerated that. However it can often work for the better, such as now how racism is much less tolerated. Your views on homosexuals are outdated, poor, and thankfully no longer part of the norm.
-
I don't take offense to it. I'm repulsed by it. There's a difference.
I don't care what year it is. I find it disgusting and confusing when someone portrays themselves as something that they're not. I mean what kind of homosexuals are they trying to attract by looking like a man? I thought lesbians didn't find men attractive, why would they dress/look like one?
Common sense? Yeah well parts that work together like penis and vagina make a ton of sense to me. Penis on penis not so much.
I said to each his own because I don't care if people are gay. I'm not going to any protests condemning them. I won't vote against gay marriage. I won't do anything to hurt their "cause". I could care less.
We know you could care less. That's obvious
-
Numark, I'm about done with you, you're not making any sense? What do you think a hypothesis is? More importantly, why do you see irony there? I question all methodology no matter what source or on any subject.
Tim-
I'm not explaining everything but a true scientific hypothesis is something that can be tested by statistics, research, or some scientific method. A hypothesis that isn't testable isn't much of a hypothesis.
You were ironic because you keep talking about true science, and how psychology often brings poor research to the table. Yet here you are talking about the same thing you complain about. That's irony.
Feel free to be done with me. You are the one constantly quoting posts and responding with paragraph of borderline nonsense at times. I'm not saying you are right it wrong, and I think it's cool how into your theories you are, and how you love learning. But you need to start being more open to all research, don't discount entire fields, and for the love of god learn how to be more brief
-
Dorkington –
Agreed, and that’s all I’ve been really trying to convey, among other things, that drive by onlookers are so quick to judge on both sides of the debate. I would warn a little though about using Kinsey as a reliable source for discussions revolving around sexuality. He’s generally considered sort of a quack, and his scales have been shown to be inaccurate by contemporary measures, not to mention some of his ideas on sexuality as it were. That said, he did have some intriguing posits on sex and sexuality and still worth reading about for anyone looking at the history of the issue.
The point I initially raised about humans having a primarily heterosexual potential at birth though coincides, or is at least not refuted by anything anyone else has presented thus far, nor any scientist research that I’ve ever read on the subject. Granted it is a hypothesis of mine, I like to think of it as a well-reasoned one, but none the less one that is at the moment not testable. Point being that I do not believe hat there is a homosexual, or bi-sexual, or any sexual or sexuality gene. We are who we are based on our experiences and our experiences train us to fall into one, two or three or any number of sexual attractive markers, and these markers are all primarily set prior to the maturation of our brains wiring, namely the prefrontal cortex.
Regards,
Tim-
Ah the irony of you having a hypothesis that cannot be tested. The same person who questions the methodology of psychological research.
-
I believe homosexuality is both by choice and from birth. Let me explain. You're not actually gay until you have sex with somebody from the same sex. For example, a person with homicidal thoughts isn't a murderer until he kills someone. Make sense?
....being gay is being sexually attracted to someone of the same sex. It's not actually having sex. By your thought process virgins don't have a sexual orientation
-
Makes no sense, huh? Okay then, I've gotta question for you guys, do you believe God punishes us for our thoughts or our actions?
No
-
Huh? As someone with a background in statistics and research you have a problem with me stating that controlling for variables, and assigning weight to them has nothing to do with it? come one now?
Tim-
No i have a problem with this thought process you have:
I'm a big believer in neuroscience and neuropsychology as there's very little one can do to manipulate the data. In other words, one cannot "misinterpret" the datasets or correlations. The same cannot be said of the "light" science we can psychology. If your in the field please do not take offense, but let' face it, when psychologists enter the realm of social matters, the do NOT have a good track record.That statement is just not true. You can manipulate that data just as much as psychology. You can misinterpret the datasets or correlations in any field. You could fit any number/research/data to fit a biased opinion regardless of the field that research is in. I know thats true because I know I could do it. Im not saying one field doesnt have more bs research than the other, but I'm just letting oyu know both fields can have great or terrible research. To discount an entire research field like you have said over and over, is extremely ignorant. And before you said you don't do that, here is an example
That all said, if you have anything other than psychological studies I’d be curious to read them. -
Juronimo –
Uh huh, yep, I remember now, and I addressed all of your points equally. Futility is in the eye of the beholder. But I am curious why you felt as though your opinions had more weight? And specifically, why you thought I wasn’t listening? If you are reasonable and honest in your debate I will also be so in kind. I think your memory of that exchange is devoid of the usual techniques employed by your side of the debate. You first start at attempting to shame your opponent with terms like intolerant, homophobic, bigot, hater, and then as has predictably happened already the insinuation that someone so opposed to homosexuality (which I am not but you’re all too blind to actually read what I’m suggesting and have become so programed to attack attack attack any alternative view) must themselves be gay. I have no use for this, and will respond with the same vitriol.
That all said, if you have anything other than psychological studies I’d be curious to read them. If you’re referring to hormonal causation, or inuterin, or brain studies of females and gay males, save yourself some time, although I find some of the research promising it’s still rather inconclusive. Now with regards to twin studies (A psychological study by the way) your interpretation of those studies and what they actually say is amusing. It demonstrates that you actually do not understand the subject very well, or if you do, your delivery was way off. I’d would be curious to hear you speak intelligently about genetics though, not to mention evolution and how it all seems (in your mind) to point to a genetic cause for homosexuality, or some evolutionary mechanism where homosexuality would be advantageous. I’m all ears.
The problem for psychology is not in the discipline if practiced honestly, it is in the ethics of setting a proper study. One where we can control for all possible variables, and assign weight to the correlations. It really can’t be done, so instead we have researchers claiming they can do it without all the need for this really important stuff, looking for grants, skin in the game, pick your poison, dude. I’ve never read a study by EITHER side that controls well enough to draw even proper correlations on where to go next, let alone a conclusive statement about the causal nature of homosexuality. Our friend benjamin would I hope admit this truism.
There, can we now go back to talking about sports.
Tim-
why cant people post psychological studies. If you know what you are talking then you should be able to look at a study/research from any discipline. Good methodology and research and statistics can be great from any field. Or it can be manipulated, biased, and false. That isn't a problem with just psychology. I wish you could understand something so simple. There is nothing inherent in the statistics or methodology in all psych research that makes it wrong. Just like there isn't something special about the numbers and research in non-psych research that makes it immune to any of those problems. As someone with a background in statistics and research, what you are saying is ridiculous. The problems you mention is with human error (accidental or on purpose), which is present in all research.
-
Sorry, what is "that lifestyle"?
They don't approve of another human being attracted to another human of the same sex for one reason or another. Apparently it's a lifestyle
-
Numark –
Hey, Numark, have you ever asked yourself why in any court trial where one side produces and expert psychologist, and the other side does, and that they both have access to the exact same data how either of these two experts could possibly interpret the data so diametrically opposed to each other? Some discipline, eh?
Yet benjamin would have us all believe that he’s part of some field of scientists that have the utmost integrity. Not suggesting benjamin doesn’t I don’t know him, but broadly speaking there’s plenty of evidence to prove my point, and I’, willing to let it rest there.
Tim-
Any research or data can be manipulated. No discipline is immune to that. I don't see your point
-
This thread is, predictably, spiraling out of control.
It truly is great! I'm at work trying to kill time and enjoy reading this
-
so what you are saying is that unless one has not read enough research, or research using "acceptable" methods, he or she has no right to offer an opinion?
Nope. You asked what constitutes being an expert. I answered. I never said anything about offering opinions. Maybe you have me confused or maybe you misread something
-
what is the criteria for one to have "expertise" in homosexuality?
Probably have read enough research on the subject to make an unbiased claim. Or a researcher that uses acceptable methods.
-
In other words, one cannot "misinterpret" the datasets or correlations. The same cannot be said of the "light" science we can psychology. If your in the field please do not take offense, but let' face it, when psychologists enter the realm of social matters, the do NOT have a good track record.
Not true at all. Not even a little bit. Sorry
-
He shouldn't be permitted to shower with his teammates or even change in the same lockeroom. Do you think male coaches shower with WNBA athletes? If I were in an all female shower I would be taking peeks every chance I got. I'd try to conceal it as best I can, but I'd still do it.
He should also accept the fact that slurs will be said from time to time and he shouldn't take it personal. His teammates should try to minimize that as much as possible, but you can't expect the vast majority to change for the minority.
He should also avoid patting teammates on the rear end. I'm sure you guys don't go around patting women on their butts at the work place, right?
Other than that he should be treated equally. Lol
In all seriousness this is one brave individual and I wouldn't mind him being a Bill.
I was reading through this and was like this is so stupid. Very nice though haha
-
The only thing in this entire post that I understand is "belinda," ironically enough.
This made me laugh way too much
Stevie Johnson should be dealt addition by subtraction
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
It's like a bad car wreck, besides the part about wanting to look.