So I am making up my own setting and naturally, because I am progressive SJW piece of shit, I have to consider how do cultures in my magical realms deal with queers. Well most of them stone them to death or boil them alive and eat them or administer corrective rape, but then there are some that would either see it as a waste or are relatively progressive and tolerant.
Is there an other real world example of exclusively gay army or navy other than the Sacred Band of Thebes? I need it for inspiration.
>real world exclusively gay army
Sparta's phalanxes were very gay, since it tied so heavily into the older man / younger man homosexual relationship dynamics of their culture, but it wasn't like they created a Gay Division.
>have to consider how do cultures in my magical realms deal with queers.
Most fantasy worlds are culturally at a level of arranged marriages for the purpose of increasing the number of hands available to work the farms.
Even in the West, as recently as 50 years ago people would live their entire lives without even knowing that being gay was a possibility that existed. Watch interviews with very elderly homosexuals, they'll almost all say that they thought they were the only one until the last few decades.
So, just... don't. It won't come up.
>as recently as 50 years
If you go back to the Romans, there's evidence of men entering pseudo-marriages with other men in relationships euphemistically called "brotherhoods" and plenty of graffiti about dudes fuckin' dudes. The concept of "gay-ness" as, like, a social identity is very modern, yes, but the practice of same-sex sexual acts and even same-sex romance are not.
OP should take note of the fact that gay culture has its roots in anti-gay legislation; the gays developed codes and anti-languages like Polari and the hanky code, they set up varyingly-discreet gay clubs and watering holes, primarily as a defence mechanism. The military's anti-gay protocols did not discourage the incredibly gay image of the armed forces, especially the Navy. As mainstream acceptance of homosexuality grows, those aspects of the subculture become less and less relevant; Polari is dead now, gay clubs are less lucrative and many are going out of business. So there's actually more likely to be a "gay culture" in those areas where anti-gay sentiment is strongest, even if it's in the closet. In those more progressive areas, it's likely to just be seen as like a personality trait and not catered to as much.
>Assuming all societies resemble Abrahamic cultures
>Assuming it's not like classical Greece
It shouldn't really matter.
Killing off gays = less people to work and fight, which for your typical fantasy kingdom, is a bad idea.
As for inspiration, european nobility seemed to have more gays, but that could be attributed to the lower classes having less time for romance.
They don't really have a conception of 'gay', since marriage is instead 'life-bonds', and their society views gender as supremely unimportant, mostly due to the fact that their species isn't very sexually dimorphic.
It's viewed as untraditional, irresponsible, and elven. Generally kept a secret.
It's viewed as a sign that one belongs to the Matron Goddess, so you get sent to a monastery to learn the arts of healing at a young age.
You're expected to adopt the role of the opposite sex in society. So a gay orc would be among the women gathering herbs and brewing battle-draught, while a lesbian orc would be expected to hunt and make war.
Depends on the culture.
A lot of people forget that Renaissance France had a great deal of tolerance for same sex relationships as long as it was kept private, and that lesbian romances were culturally accepted as the norm among their growing daughters asd long as they were married off at some point. Even those marriages were not necessarily exclusive, if the husband or wife found themselves needing the touch of a fellow or lady of the same sex.
England, on the other hand, that was a disaster.
>Hey guys, are there any faggots here who get all of their history lessons from gay propaganda website?
>I want to read a lot of fake gay propaganda
Go to /pol/ or /lgbt/, you fucking moron.
Both Xenophon, Aristotle and that greek historiam that lived during the hight of the roman empire tell us thatspartans abhored homosexual relationships. This thing about sparta being gay is a myth. Other greeks were fine with it.
It's now apparently propaganda to believe gays weren't invented by Anne Rice in a laboratory and have in fact been around as long as people have.
It doesn't have to come up in your campaign, but it's a fun thing to flesh out your setting with.
When you're in a mine, you're too busy working to ever think about fucking someone.
I don't think you realize just how fucking grueling mining is.
If you're done mining, and you still have energy to fuck, you weren't fucking mining.
>Hey guys, let's force our political shit into every board we can, using flimsy topics that are just put in place to allow us to run our mouths about our fetish!
Seriously, stop this shit, you trolls. Stay in your containment boards, you have two of them now.
You could just make up your own societies. Your creativity isn't bound by history. More importantly, think about how you're writing this stuff up because no one wants to play a game where every corner they turn they're seeing some new condemnation of some ancient society's treatment of gay people.
This does bring up a problem I'm starting to have with my group though, /tg/. My group of friends (who I've known forever) who I run games for have all gotten really wrapped up in queer/trans culture. It hasn't gotten too extreme yet, mostly involves painted nails and bitching about cis people and toxic masculinity. One of em even keeps making comments about how I need to "come out" as asexual.
They've also all really gotten into the BDSM scene, and won't shut up about that either. They keep trying to invite me to sex shops and events for this shit, and I'm concerned I'm going to have to give them a hard rule to not talk about their sex play when I'm hanging out with them.
So now I'm concerned about running games for them because I'm afraid it's just going to turn into trans identity and magical realm circle jerks. I'm dangerously close to living the nightmare, /tg/.
>Well most of them stone them to death or boil them alive and eat them or administer corrective rape
Why? In the majority of the history of the world, this is not how the non-heteronormative were treated. It sounds like you want to make this an issue when, for most people and places, it wouldn't be. Maybe you've got a giant SJW propaganda stick shoved up your ass, but it seems more likely to me that you're trying to be obnoxious and throw it in your players' faces that "queers are marginalized and victims!"
I hope you're as vociferously opposed to political shit in every other thread about a hypothetical rpg setting.
I'm with you though, I can't go a day without seeing a thread about getting a quest from a king or princess or some shit. It's high time we ran these trolls out of here with their crypto-monarchist agenda.
Why would you, in a game of pretend, desire to be oppressed?
Your inferiority complex is showing OP
Why can't homosexuality just blend into the background like it does in all respectable individuals?
I'm not the one making /pol/ threads on /tg/.
If you want to discuss your controversial topics, take it to /pol/. That's the board for these kind of stupid debates. What part of that is hard to understand?
Do you honestly believe anyone thinks you're genuine?
>I need to "come out" as asexual
What you could do is call them all together, telling them you have something important to say. Acknowledge that you've been single a long time, and sometimes you don't feel like you understand where they're coming from on a lot of issues concerning sex and gender.
Because you're a Republican.
>I'm not the one making /pol/ threads on /tg/.
I know you're upset and irrational right now, so I fully expect you to ignore what I'm about to say, but this is my third post in this thread. The other two were >>45320246
When you calm down, I bet you'll feel a little silly over getting so worked up, but for now you should probably just close this tab and take a break from the Internet.
>It hasn't gotten too extreme yet
>mostly involves painted nails and bitching about cis people and toxic masculinity
>they're also all gotten into the BDSM scene, and won't shut up about that either
>hasn't gotten too extreme yet
The best way to deal with homosexuality is to just say "they don't view it as any differently than heterosexuality" and leave it at that. It's the same with real life racism: it's better left out of the game in general.
sexual relations with young men, especially those seen as apprentices of an older man, were not seen in a poor light by many Samurai.
"How manly am I? So manly than even other men crave the D"
You're not replying to his content, or his tone. You're just spouting shit to make it seem like his posts ought to be disregarded, when the posts you claim as your own are textbook examples of "can't tell if butthurt, or trolling for emotional effect."
Why don't you go kill yourself, faggot?
The idea is that you fight more passionately with your lover at your side, because now you're not just fighting for your life, but also the life of your lover. You'd also probably work better with them since you know them intimately than you would if they were just some stranger. I mean, even armies that didn't do that still had companies of men that all knew each other and worked together and were like brothers.
When they start actually wearing women's clothing, insist on bizarre feminine names, and actually start bringing their bondage shit to game night then I'll consider things to have gone too far.
For now I can still have normal conversations with them about 70% of the time.
>You're not replying to his content, or his tone.
Why would I? He called me the OP because I called him a troll. I don't give a shit about this thread. I'm just in here killing time while I eat my biscuits and gravy.
>The idea is that you fight more passionately with your lover at your side, because now you're not just fighting for your life, but also the life of your lover.
That's backreading gay ideas. It had very little to do with "romance", and was largely just a show of dominance. It was basically institutionalized prison rape, where older guys would fuck young men in order to assert their position.
Native Americans - South, Meso, and North: Nope.
Asians: Most often nope.
Pacific Islanders: at least two cultures notable for nope.
English: had a gay king, nobody gave a shit.
Ancient Greeks: laughingpederast.jpg
Which ancient cultures are you talking about, again?
True. It's better to just leave sexual preferences aside in games.
But if a player wants to play a gay character, it's better to go "alright, you're gay, let's continue with the game" instead of making it a thing where they get bashed for it. Even if everyone at the table is super cool, it just makes things weird to constantly be dealing with real issues, like every game you play is gonna be a special episode of Blossom or something.
The thing about gays is... *sigh* its really obvious that their sexuality is made up. Despite the fact that theirs is a hella-awfull breeding strategy you have to remember, so is the sloths, and they still survive to the next generation. So what does this mean? Well for one thing, gays are breeders too, yes less often and/or less successfully, but ultimatly thats not what matters.
tldr gays are sloths.
>But how do we deal with them sanpai?
We dont. Their allready extinguishing themselves through this 'non breeder' ideology, and the many gay diseases that are also clining on like sloths. AIDS being but one example.
Did that help? No?... well i feel better.
The fact that the phrase "Toxic Masculinity" is in their vocabulary is pretty much a guarantee that it'll come to that.
Imagine if you're hanging out with one of your friends and about 30% of the time he talks about "degeneracy". How long do you think you have before he goes full /pol/?
Ever heard of Muslims?
There's only a billion or so of them. You may have never heard of them.
Careful with your revised history lesson anon..you can't be a good prog and insult Islam..
>have in fact been around as long as people have.
And thats where your argument weakens. Because NOTHING has been around as long as people have.
Thats like saying;
>swords, they've been around aslong as people have
Its a fallacy but i dont know what to call it... appeal to history?
Native Americans: So many tribes you can't begin to fucking count. Half of which were totally okay with ritual sacrifice/cannibalism
Africa: What's for dinner tonight? Albino? (and let's not get into what they do to gays today)
Pacific Islanders: You had to pick two (unnamed) cultures out a few hundred that didn't advocate eating people, well done.
English: Please don't stand here and tell me the English didn't stone gays and burn heretics. An ambiguously gay king doesn't discount that.
Asians: How broad a category can you make? And might I ask, who were the Khans?
Ancient Greeks: You do realize that boytoys weren't acceptable in Greece, right? It was a hilarious meme that came about because Senators would spread rumors of pedophilia about their opponents to discredit them.
I realize this is generally reserved as an insult but I have to ask... Are you in the 8th grade?
The jews really hate gays (among their own, of course, we all know how it is with everyone else), I think Israel is the only first world country I remember that had a murder in the middle of a parade.
>Historical facts are now propoganda.
The propoganda is the gays whining that they've been mistreated for all of history - much like the feminist narrative, and much for the same purpose - to get undeserved sympathy.
You're the fag for buying their revisionist victim-hood.
>They've also all really gotten into the BDSM scene, and won't shut up about that either. They keep trying to invite me to sex shops and events for this shit
Welp... i think i can safely say /pol/ warned you.
Is it still safe ¬¬
Nig nog, Tom of Finland actually did what no American male ever achieved - he killed russian communists in an all-out war for the survival of his nation.
Back to /co/ or suicide, forget your other options you faggot.
I think for now I'll just have to bite the bullet because I don't have any other actual friends in this town.
At the least I'm gonna try my damnedest to maintain hard rules about no magical realm shit at the table.
/co/ currently has a 700 post thread about whether or not pedophilia is wrong. It's less than five hours old and is mostly people saying that there's nothing wrong with having sex with 12 year old girls if they want it.
>Doesn't understand evolution
>Thinks all human behavior is biologically determinate
>/co/ currently has a 700 post thread about whether or not pedophilia is wrong. It's less than five hours old and is mostly people saying that there's nothing wrong with having sex with 12 year old girls if they want it.
I never said all human behaviour is biologically determenistic. Only that which IS biologically determenistic is healthy. Not passing on your genes to the next generation is abundantly NOT healthy.
I mean... what side of the debate are you even on?
>Flowers and plants indeed started existing after mankind. Also dinosaurs.
I think you missunderstand. Partly due to my grammar.
Im not sayin "all things existed after humanity." Im saying "Everything had a beginning, and not all started when humans started." We're essentially criticising the same logic.
My apoligies for any missunderstanding.
I just have it range from "keep it on the downlow as a private diversion while you marry a woman" to "burn em at the stake" with most cultures leaning towards kill em, while the few cultures with open homosexuality, it's only acceptable in niche and fringe societal roles, even then it's viewed as weird.
From what I can tell, that's about the range you'll see with all pre-modern cultures.
By that definition, almost everything the overwhelming majority of humans do is not healthy. Sapience and the ability to make decisions that are not oriented around reproduction is unhealthy.
>I have to consider how do cultures in my magical realms deal with queers
Shame them into hiding or stone them for any race besides elves.
Elves are fully accepting of it and many of them are homos.
Probably it's bisexuals that pass on the gay gene. So say if bisexuality is if a person has a "gay gene" and a "straight gene", then if they marry another bisexual they'd have roughly a quarter gay, quarter straight and half bi kids.
Probably since gay folks aren't breeders, they have more time to helping out their straight and bisexual siblings. so since they don't have children, they can devote more resources to helping relatives who do have children.
That is a thin end of the wedge fallacy.
Just because SOME humans choose to do unhealthy things does not mean that ALL sapience is unhealthy.
You obviously dont understand what an evolutionary stable strategy is. And no, not everyone has them. Smokers for example, increasing their chances of cancer, are not an ESS.
>so since they don't have children, they can devote more resources to helping relatives who do have children.
And while this is not THE BEST evolutionary stable strategy. It is however a workable strategy.
Just fyi; having a gay helping his sisters kids is still not as efficiant as if he'd just had his own kids.
On the other hand newly married Spartans had their wives shave their heads like men so that it was easier for them to transition.
So probably more of a NO HOMO NO HOMO JUST TWO BROS OILING UP THEIR MUSCLES thing.
I mean, it's actually an interesting thing to consider adding to some weird-ass fantasy race, but you sure aren't talking about reality here? Cause i hope not.
It's not the best strategy but a lot of times folks overlook that a person doesn't have to pass on his genes if they help their relatives pass on genes.
The workability of it would also depend on how viable children surviving to adulthood are and how high the resource drain is of having kids. I know kids kinda pay for themselves after the 4th or 5th child but an adult who doesn't breed is in a way like a child who doesn't survive except they can contribute far more to the family unit.
Homosexuality isn't just genetics, it's also influenced by hormone levels while in the womb and one's life experiences, especially during one's childhood.
There is a decent amount scientific research on the matter, I suggest instead of talking out your ass on 4chan you go read you a book.
I don't think there's a single gay gene or some shit but it does seem to run in families. Though men and women are kinda different in that men are more "hard-coded" with their sexual orientation.
It's probably like autism where there's 5 or 6 different genetic components that only cause gayness in a perfect gay storm of circumstanced.
It doesn't seem consistent to think that genetics and biology play a huge role in how people are and then say gayness is 100% nurture. Nurture probably pushes folks 1-3 points in either direction on the kinsey scale.
>How is this made up?
After their dicks get hard they ejaculate sperm. And the only use for sperm is to inseminate an egg. Thus they are roleplaying insemination. Which is pretend as fuck.
>Do you think fetishes are just made up too?
>pass on his genes if they help their relatives pass on genes.
Yes, which explains some kinds of altruisim (For the greater good Tau'n)
>nfluenced by hormone levels while in the womb
Yes. And exposure to xenoestrogens in life could conceivably be making too many gays for society. But most debates overlook this fact.
With hormones though, a lot of research in that direction didn't provide results because it focused too much on adult hormone levels rather than developmental levels. Giving gay people more testosterone doesn't seem to change their orientation though mtf trans report changes in orientation sometimes. But looking at profoundly mentally ill people and then applying that to a larger sample should taken with a grain of salt.
It went pretty weird pretty quick.
I was just gonna talk about gender non-binary presentation in India and Samoa but shit I can't be bothered arguing with some lunatic who froths at the mouth at the idea of
>evolutionary stable strategy
>It's probably like autism where there's 5 or 6 different genetic components
Thats not the explanation of autism. The largly overlooked fact is that all of autism has increased since the 90s and is still increasing, whereas previously it mostly didnt exist. Pointing to an environemental cause, rather than a genetic one.
One explanation could be the presence of xenoestrogens as i stated here:
Nah, it seems autism has a genetic component. It definitely runs in families but genetic profiles of families with autism point towards several factors that "increase likelihood" and certain combinations which have higher chances than others.
We've probably had slight aspergers in folks and then environmental causes intensify symptoms.
The controversy behind what causes autism is complex because it's been proven to have a genetic component but it's increasing at such a rapid rate. Remember, genetic component is usually "risk factor" rather than a direct cause with most psych disorders.
>xenoestrogens cause autism
That's fucking stupid. It's far more likely to be a statistical mirage coupled with poor socialization because of screens and poor parenting. Turns out nuclear families are not good ways to raise children.
>Giving gay people more testosterone doesn't seem to change their orientation
Perhapse this suggests their orientation is more ideological than biological. They do afterall have a flag.
I mean, any normal sexual situation is influenced by hormones. Gays not being influenced by hormones might be like the canary in the coalmine.
Besides, i remember reading somewhere that gays are far more reactive to xenoestrogen than they should be. So maybe is estrogen-ophilic rather than hypo-testosterone.
>autism has increased since the 90s and is still increasing, whereas previously it mostly didnt exist
Greater awareness and diagnosis, for the most part. Since about 1970 we've seen an uptick in awareness of medical conditions in the public, use of medicine, etc.
Weird people today are weird people. "Weird people" in 1970 had "anyone who could scrape together a subsistance living situation despite their profound difficulties" as a part of it.
Because of the difference in the way labour was needed, and businesses worked you could have very ill people just working or being a hobo and not getting scooped up by the system.
People would by-and-large ignore them, except to ridicule them or antagonise them.
My granddad used to tell me about a projectionist in a cinema he frequented who was probably full-on schizophrenic. He was always talking about aliens, etc but nobody really listened and he could operate a projector well so he kept his job. Hanged himself one day, and his flat was full of tinfoil things he'd made to fend off fucking Martians or whatever. Like he though he'd built some bunker with sentry guns and stuff but it was toilet rolls, cardboard boxes, found objects and foil everywhere.
Martians must have breached his defences in the end. Fucking sad.
One of the big reasons that autism diagnosis has increased since the 90's was that in 1994 the diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum disorders was expanded.
More people were diagnosed because more people were able to be diagnosed.
You don't need to bring in xenoestrogens or even a genetic component to autism when the cause of increased diagnosis is clear.
Well it's not that it doesn't alter their orientation, it makes them incredibly horny.
A lot of research was done into hypo-testosterone as a hypothesis in the 60's and 70's but the lack of results made the hypothesis unpopular.
Men are pretty much hardcoded in their orientation at 16-18 while women tend to fluctuate more throughout their lifetimes. If hormones play a role, it's more likely to be during childhood and early adolescence than in adulthood.
The only trends I've seen when it comes to adults is anecdotal evidence that pumping a man full of estrogen can alter his orientation and vague studies pointing to lesbians and bisexual men having slightly above average test levels.
You are so far out of line with the current understanding of science that I can't even begin to tell you where you're fucking up.
It's probably partially genetic, partially amniotic environment, partially upbringing and partially social.
Like almost all human behaviour more complicated than reflex.
High estrogen levels doesn't always correspond to low testosterone levels in men. If estrogen gets high enough to be a disorder, the body usually converts some of it into testosterone as well. Though at that point, you're seeing manboobs and baldness.
Men fluctuate in their hormonal levels more than women do. This is on a month to month basis as well as on a lifetime scale.
Have you ever done juice? That is to say, anabolic steroids?
I did for a while, because I'm not very intelligent and I thought it was a good idea. It wasn't.
But that shit made me horny as hell. If I wasn't lifting I was jerking off or trying to get laid. I fucked men, women, trans people I didn't give a fuck. I just wanted an assisted orgasm.
Then I dislocated my shoulder and I haven't really been able to lift as much as I did and I haven't done any juice in like six years.
>Turns out nuclear families are not good ways to raise children.
Your perilously close to making a Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.
Well what if you had a gene that said "i am susceptible to this environmental cause". Then it would explain it travelling in families and also explaining its recent raise in the population. The answer could still be xenoestrogens.
>all gotten really wrapped up in queer/Trans culture.
>"Cis people" "toxic masculinity"
> wants you to "come out as asexual"
>Try to bring you to bdsm stores
>not too extreme
WEW LAD I'm triggered
Get some new friends, anon
How's this for a logical fallacy?
Your argument is shit and you're stupid. Pretty much anything you say beyond hard evidence is going to be disregarded as the opinions of a mildly retarded 'sperg who's shitty about his diagnosis.
And learn the difference between your/you're.
You could look into German masculinity within their gay community. It's kind of interesting how homosexuality had a very masculine connotation in Germany leading up to WWII. It was sorta viewed as very masculine to take it up the butt, or give it to the butt. A lot of gays contributed to the nazi movement until Hitler turned on them and really cracked down.
Granted, this was a part of German masculinity. Not to imply the germans are any more gay than any other culture, or that the religious community didn't have their own disdain for the gay community, hyper-masculine or not.
>queer/trans culture. It hasn't gotten too extreme yet, mostly involves painted nails and bitching about cis people and toxic masculinity. One of em even keeps making comments about how I need to "come out" as asexual.
Your friends are insane.
>They've also all really gotten into the BDSM scene, and won't shut up about that either. They keep trying to invite me to sex shops and events for this shit, and I'm concerned I'm going to have to give them a hard rule to not talk about their sex play when I'm hanging out with them.
Your friends are not sane or healthy. You need new friends. This is the most cancerous shit I've read in a while.
>Autism existed, it's just no one bothered to delineate the retarded ones as anything but re-res, and the non-retarded ones were just weird assholes.
A valid hypothesis. But proving a negative will give you trouble.
>Martians must have breached his defences in the end. Fucking sad.
When will we as a society get up and notice this sad pattern of events.
But seriously. Same responce as above.
>was that in 1994 the diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum disorders was expanded.
Same responce as above.
>more well developed primary male sexual characteristics.
>it's more likely to be during childhood and early adolescence than in adulthood.
This is my hypothesis too.
>i know all of the most current and up to date propaganda for the flag waving gays.
Id rather not. If theres a weakness in my xenoestrogen theory then point to it.
Damn son, I've read this whole thread and you were up to something that was atleast a valid looking theory. Why would you resort to ad hominem just at the end?
This is my first post in the thread, btw.
>How's this for a logical fallacy?
>Your argument is shit and you're stupid.
That is an ad hominem fallacy.
If i am wrong. You actually have to point to why. Not just get angry because your pet theory is challanged.
>xenoestrogens cause autism
Good theory. Doesn't fit the facts. What does fit the facts is improved diagnostic criteria and improved reach of medical care has increased diagnosis of autism.
Unless you have some scholarly articles that give evidence to your hypothesis then there is no reason to even consider it.
Here is an article which statistically proves my counter hypothesis that increased diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder is due to a wider diagnostic criteria.
So, you have no evidence and are quick to call fallacies on anyone who disagrees with you.
So fuck off, retard.
Why do you people keep doing this?
>Here, have the data that proves I know what I'm talking about.
>And here have childlish insults that make everything else I wrote or linked seem useless
He really doesn't, actually. I imagine the vast majority of people you've been talking have simply given up and walked away. Not because you're right, but because they just don't care enough to argue with someone so bent into (what appears to them to be) a warped, bizarre theory with no real grounded proof.
You've consistently required proof or sources from every person whose disagreed with you, but provided none yourself. You've resorted to off-handed ad hominem on numerous occasions, and referred directly to vague conspiracy theories that, while obvious to you, are invisible at best, and laughably constructed at worst, to everyone else.
No one has to prove you're wrong. No one has to sit here and argue with someone so visibly, deeply invested in so fringe a theory. You can scream and rant about the intellectual high ground all you want, but at the end of the thread, you'll just have stuck your flag in a mole hill.
The thing there is, most sailors, on most days, are not sucking any dicks.
Then someone starts a game of Gay Chicken, and next thing I know I'm on double watches because some dumb fucks used cleaning supplies in a fashion inconsistent with HAZMAT labelling.
Things may have changed in the four years since I left, but back in 2012 that was an exaggeration and our actual homosexual was the second biggest faggot.
>can't handle the banter
do you even know where you are?
Just because I insult you doesn't make me wrong. It also doesn't make you right.
So sack up and handle, or fuck right off with your circumstantial argument.
Autism is too broad a diagnosis to stem purely from one factor. Imagine if you claimed all cancer was caused by smoking.
The burden of proof is on you here, buddy, and considering the boldness of your supposition you are going to have to bring your A game when it comes to supporting it.
As for the link between xenoestrogens and homosexuality, I do wonder if it's more that people who undergo precocious puberty have longer to develop sexual urges and more time to consider them before they're socialised on the subject, and therefore have a stronger understanding of their sexual identity? Not that more of them are gay, per se, but fewer of them are deeply closeted?
>Why would you resort to ad hominem just at the end?
Where? If i have made one i will admit to it. But i dont see it...
>Doesn't fit the facts.
I advise caution. Increased diagnosis does not completely explain an increase in the disease.
Its not but i would be honoured if you would do the honours.
>I imagine the vast majority of people you've been talking have simply given up and walked away.
This isnt debating. Good day.
>Autism is too broad a diagnosis to stem purely from one factor.
But my theory does go a long way to explaining it, and it is comparativly better than other theories such as 'gay gene'.
That's because any perception of an increase in the disease is a statistical mirage.
Or; the causes of autism spectrum disorder are complex and not well known, and may include factors such as socialization, genetics or epi-genetics.
Occam's razor suggests we treat it as a statistical mirage until we have good information or evidence on other causes.
You do not have good evidence for your argument. I do.
From "Explaining the Increase in the Prevalence of Autism Spectrum Disorders", Hansen, Schendel, Parner;
" Of these, 192 diagnoses were reported before 1994; 100, from 1994 through 1995; and 3664, after 1995."
Which coincides neatly with expanded diagnostic criteria.
Increased diagnosis absolutely does account for the perceived increased prevalence of the disease. You're just a fucking idiot with no understanding of how statistics works and how your experience might not reflect reality.
I suggest Stat101. Your local community college or even online universities will offer a course.
>Or; the causes of autism spectrum disorder are complex and not well known, and may include factors such as socialization, genetics or epi-genetics.
>Occam's razor suggests we treat it as a statistical mirage until we have good information or evidence on other causes.
waiving waving I can accept this intermediate conclusion, for now.
No. You made my spicy rice tast of gay debates. Im going off to color space marines.
Science thanks you for your efforts, brave anon.
>I suggest Stat101. Your local community college or even online universities will offer a course.
Ill remind you that statistics can prove anything if they exist in a vacuum. It is the purpose of debates and fallacies to challenge statistics, not just to wait until someone creates a counter statistic.
>fallacies to challenge statistics
>wait until someone creates a counter statistic
You mean "puts their grant money where there mouth is and does some motherfucking science."
Absolutely irrelevant. You need a grounding in statistics to be able to interpret data. You need to interpret data to do science.
You are doing none of these things.
bro-anon you a pretty ok anon :3
>the funny part of your post wasn't phrased with academic rigor despite the clear overall message that creating counterstatistics would require experiments, analysis and other tough stuff for smart guys
You wasted your trips.
>You need to interpret data to do science.
No. You need SCIENTIFIC METHOD to do science.
Scientific method goes:
Observation, Hypothesis, Null Hypothesis, Prediction, Theory, Testing (Including statistics) intermediate conclusion, conclusion, revaluation.
It does not. As you have said; start with statistics and end with statistics. Or data interpretation as you put it.
>argument skills you redneck piece of shit.
An intermediate conclusion is all youve got. Not quite the end of an argument.
but Gays support pedophilia
Bullshit pedastry was heavily practiced in the hellenic states and sparta was no exception. The jap samurai did the same shit.
God dammit even /tg/ isn't safe from /pol/'s bullshit.
How about just telling your friends that all their overemphasis on sexualization is making you uncomfortable. If they don't respect you enough to not talk about it get new friends.
Actually just looked into it. Apparently Sparta claims they didn't follow the common greek practices but I don't believe it for a second.
>a massive case of "no homo" and its only gay if balls touch.
Don't be a square anon. BDSM is fun for the whole family.
I've told them several times to knock it off, but they don't take it seriously. I haven't been too serious about it yet, mostly because I'm concerned I'll just get told off for kinkshaming.
I honestly don't care at all if that's what they're into. I just wish I could go back to a time when people weren't so damn open about what turns them on. That kind of talk has no place in normal conversation.
>That kind of talk has no place in normal conversation.
That's your perspective on the situation. That said, voice your displeasure and don't be a whiny weasel. If there is not a mutual agreement you can come to, don't play with them anymore.
They might not, because it is rules mid to heavy and confusing. Which tumblr people always seem averse to in my anecdotal experience.
So you are saying, despite clear homosexual tendencies in other primates, humans did not have homosexual specimens before actually becoming their own species? Is that your argument?
men are aroused by young boys
a few clever ones say "we are helping them develop and teaching them"
men are encouraged to teach, and they get to fuck all the young boys they want
really though, eventually it wasnt as sexual as you might think, as it became more about uniting wealthy houses together than about boy fucking. (but there was still boy fucking)
You're a total fucking retard.
>Sex hasn't been around as long as people have!
>Organizing into hierarchies hasn't been around as long as people have!
>Collecting food hasn't been around as long as people have!
>Speech and song haven't been around as long as people have!
We have a great deal of instincts, just like every other animal on the planet.
It's one possible explanation for something that Plutarch reported. Other suggestions are religious based or around the idea of a new phase in life. The gay thing seems a lot like reading into that custom, but I don't think there's any real debate about the prevalence of pederasty in Hellenic society as a whole and Sparta in particular.
Ad hominem isn't someone calling you a fartwhistle. It's someone saying your argument is wrong BECAUSE you are a fartwhistle. You can append an insult to your arguments all day long and it does nothing but make you seem rude, it doesn't invalidate the arguments. You're a fucking idiot, anon.
>Other suggestions are religious based or around the idea of a new phase in life.
That's kinda what I was saying. Like, I could understand a woman shaving her head to signify herself as off the market, but the whole "to look like men" thing sounds like someone making the equivalent to a "how many Germans does it take to screw in a light bulb" joke.
Non-Muslim Arabs, which was the state of the Arabs and their predecessors for almost all of their history, aggressively didn't give a fuck about it. There's still well-maintained art pieces about dudes fucking and the neighbors WATCHING. Harems sometimes had effeminate men in them. Some of their scholars were dudelovers and it was so inconsequential that we only know about it because of implication. It just wasn't important that sometimes men fucked men. The only one revising history here is you, and you think you're some kind of conservative for doing it. You're just a religious liberal, radicalizing and modifying information for your progressive ideas of restriction and policing.
Elves in my head don't even marry typically. Depends on their specific society but basically they're all just wandering around having fun when they can. Children are a bonus, not a plan.
Dwarves are all male, and therefore exclusively homosexual unless they bang outside their race. Their reproduction is a mystery, but basically they have a patch where dwarves "plant" their "seed" in holes, and a few months later a baby pops out. It takes another month before the baby is ripe enough to be picked, so the dwarves take turns wrapping the baby heads in their beards.
I think he might be referring to Edward II, who historians generally accept to have been a prancing lala, which is why when his wife and her lover coup d'etat'd his ass they had him executed with a hot poker up his nethers.
Edward was far from the only king known to have a male "favourite", he's just the more historically notable of them because of the coup. He wasn't executed for BEING gay, mind you; he abdicated following a calamitous French invasion and was killed to prevent rebels from reinstating him. Oddly enough, when you're king that tends to be the more important thing about you, that you're the king.
I just checked Cyropaedia, Anabasis, Hellenica, Agesilaus and Memorabilia. Xenophon said nothing about spartans abhoring buttsex.
Show proof for the others, or stop being a bullshiting idiot afraid of your own asshole.