You cannot have a truly patrician relationship with a member of the opposite sex.
Breeders always want to drag you into their petit bourgeois desires of marriage and reproduction.
Breeder couples spend all their time together engaging in petty squabbles brought about by gender differences:
>you don't appreciate all the housework I do
>you're always PMSing, it's just an excuse
>man, be my strong protector father figure
>woman, be my nurturing mother figure
It's pathetic and animalistic, a relationship not based on equity but on mere Darwinian desires to reproduce, which we have surely usurped with science.
Why does all the best intellectual thought come from the Greeks?
>Sappho, intvented the muse (innately same-sex concept imho) dyke
>Alexander the Great
I'm equally sexually attracted to both genders, but there's no way I'll end up some housewife to a breeder.
Don't forget the other rather disgusting habits and shortfallings of heterosexuals:
>100% of accident babies occur during heterosexual intercourse, contributing to our current population problem.
>Homosexuals are often seen as the prime transmitters of STDs, which heterosexuals interpret to mean risk-free sex for themselves, causing them to engage in even higher risk activities.
>Heterosexuals are much less capable of long-term, loving relationships, given that their divorce rates are almost twice those of homosexuals.
>Homosexuals often establish one partner as dominant and superior, and the other as submissive and inferior. Unlike in homosexual couples, this spreads to all aspects of life; not just the bedroom.
>Many heterosexuals campaign against LGBT equality and marriage rights, then accuse homosexuals of bigotry and enforcing their own "lifestyle" on the heterosexual population once these rights are attained.
>Heterosexuals often struggle to remain comfortable around homosexuals of the same gender, showing that many are unaware of just how unattractive they actually are.
>Children of same-sex parents tend to be more open-minded and intelligent than those from heterosexual households.
>Children of multi-sex parents often become more emotionally attached to one parent than the other; a phenomenon much less common in homosexuals.
>Multi-sex parents reciprocate little love towards their offspring, often seeing them as an investment of their time and genetics. They will happily discard of them if the child does not satisfy their desires; a mentality which stems from their inbuilt ability to replace unwanted children within 9 months, as an when wanted.
And they call us degenerates?
75% of homosexual men are in open relationships. 50% of aids infested people are gay men. I agree that homosexual relationships are superior when done right but the majority of homosexuals are as bad as breeders if not worse. Loving monogamous long term homosexual relationships are superior to breeder crap however.
Cis Straight people should just die desu
All thar's wrong with the world is their fault.
If countries were run by lgbtqi people there wouldn't be any more wars because we'd understand each otger's struggle.
Then again, once we get into good, monogamous relationships, we get to put all the AIDS, hookup-degenerates, and pride-parade fags behind us. By electing honorable love lives, we have a way out; heteros have no escape, and must bear their degeneracy until they die.
Also, the worst thing that can come from gay sex is AIDS, which only impacts the individual. The worst thing that can come from hetero sex is unplanned pregnancy, which hurts the individual, the economy, the education system, the taxpayer, and pretty much everyone in the country (although isolated events have a negligible effect, the astounding rates of accident babies amplify the impact on society).
>we'd understand each other's struggle.
Even better, we wouldn't even have a struggle. Life would just be objectively easier and more equal for everyone.
>Greek society was accepting of homosexuality, and was extremely advanced compared to the rest of the world, with many mathematical and scientific principles used nowadays having been developed by them.
>Homophobic, christian England didn't have flushing toilets, logical healthcare, or basic hygiene standards.
>Then again, once we get into good, monogamous relationships
While I have nothing against monogamous relationships I'm pretty sure most gay men would want at least ~5 regular partners. Sex should be something done between close friends and not viewed as some sort of uber-special one-time-only deal because it isn't. Avoid the cognitive dissonance if you want to establish healthy networks.
Applying judeo-christian monogamy to everything under the sun is dissonant bullshit. Like I said, if it works for you and that's how you prefer to live that's fine, but it's a recipe for disaster if you expect that to be the "norm".
>Sex should be something done between close friends
>Should not viewed as some sort of uber-special one-time-only deal because it isn't
>Establishing healthy networks through sex
>Monogamy is dissonant bullshit
This is the most (heterosexual-created, utterly false, impure) meme gay set of comments ever. See pic.
>It's a recipe for disaster if you expect that to be the "norm"
But why? Why can monogamy not work? Because hetero-propaganda says so?
I know countless heterosexual couples in open relationships. I also know countless heterosexual sluts who fuck around with a group of close friends. But all the homosexuals I know (not including biscum) are either in commited monogamous relationships or married.
>This is the most (heterosexual-created, utterly false, impure
Impure? What are you, the inquisition? Note I'm not saying people should have random hookups in bathroom stalls, but having a close circle of trusted friends eliminates the cheating problem and the random sex fetish.
>But why? Why can monogamy not work? Because hetero-propaganda says so?
Actually the hetero propaganda has always been about monogamous marriage death contracts, why do you think the LGBT movement was pushing so hard for gay marriage? They fell for the bait. I'm not saying monogamy can't work, and if it does for you then enjoy, but your PURGE THE IMPURE THE CHURCH MUST SANCTIFY MY LIFE attitude is exactly what needs to be avoided.
>Implying you need to get married for monogamy
>Implying you need to be religious for marriage
>Implying marriage was invented by religion and wasn't initially a contract to bind people together legally and make it easier to track who was related to whom, and how so
Either way, whether we choose monogamy or non-monogamy, can we at least agree that heterosexuals will never be as good at making their love/sex lives work for themselves as homosexuals (and also that random anonymous hookups = AIDS and loneliness)?
I'll agree that monogamous heterosexual relationships are kind of weird and dysfunctional simply due to the ridiculous gender differences and the fact that humans are a social species; that sort of set-up is... not how things used to work. Marriage is a silly contract, whether religious or secular, because it implies the other person WILL tend to wander and needs to be reined in by a piece of paper. If the relationship truly is healthy it'll carry itself on its own without any need for external contracts. Random hookups are terrible and a symptom of not having close people to love, as you would in a small rural setting where you grew up and died with a certain number of genetically related people in a relatively less crowded setting.
>If the relationship truly is healthy it'll carry itself on its own without any need for external contracts.
This desu. I just want to get married because I choose monogamy, and it would give certain tax exemptions, inheritance exceptions, etc. to my husband and myself.
Other than that, it's just an excuse for a massive, expensive, parent-funded (because part of my cultural heritage does that) party and a vacation (which I'm also not entirely against).