hmm, not criticizing anyone specifically here except Mr. Identity perhaps. but I'm usually bothered when the same people that criticize the control and portrayals of mass media, have assumptions about people that are based on some type of mass media and fairly limited experience.
I havn't heard it much recently, but years ago it was a pretty common statement by single women to insist that all the attractive, successful, square jawed, Men's Health -looking bachelors were gay, and that all the soft slovenly remainders chowing down fried vegetable oils and unfermented dough were strait as a line. Going by Weston Price's research on physical observations alone, I suspect problems with this theory, and this also seems pretty a ridiculous probability of being reminiscent of Pottenger's cats.
If people are going on the visualizations of TV depicting people sitting around drinking Frappuccino while their housekeepers steal 2$ hour jobs from average Americans, there obviously is a disconnect from reality here. There are plenty of such gay alphas listed above work on Wall Street and are at least
fiscally conservative politically. They arn't all rolling their eyes at you for your selection at the video store and cosmetics counter. The same alienation of gays by conservatives seems conclusive information enough as to why people have left wing leanings, even though as though I hear that even gays as they become more successful and suburbanized like other minority groups tend to become more conservative. I mean, why would you want to associate with
anything that says your very being is wrong, or that you
need to do X Y and Z to fix yourself? Sounds kind of the opposite of the whole liberty thing. In addition many of the most masculine role models/historical figures (Alexander the Great) have turned out to be homosexual, and many people in power families have homosexual progeny i.e. Anderson Cooper.
As for veganism and left wing, if you are talking again of San Fransisco residents who enjoy lattes, horned rimmed glasses, and SLT's I would agree, but a huge percentage of raw vegans support Ron Paul as well as others of limited interference government as well as Natural Hygiene being under the exact belief except of ANYTHING non raw-vegetarianism producing homosexual tendencies, to the point that fasting and monofruits diets are seen as 'cures'.
Whether homosexuality is caused or influenced by nutrition I think is irrelevant because it's not a "problem" the way disease is a "problem." Maybe if >50% of a nations population was homosexual you could start to get into a problem for reproduction, but it seems to me that the homosexual population is fairly stable and has existed since historically recorded time.
True but the problem is that if someone sees people and their opinions as less than equal because of a
opinion based on false facts. I mean, they don't need to truly be threatened or concerned with their overtaking of the population, even tho you hear this all the time as well regarding education and media too.
Here you get to the meat and potatoes of our cultural view on homosexuality. Fertility cult. If you dont breed, you are useless. Do anyone know how common homosexual behavior is among animals in nature? Take into account that "humping" between animals (regardless of species) is not a sexual act, but one of domination.
The existence of homosexual animals (animals that actually co-habitate as well as 'copulate'), and the well documented presence of homosexuals far prior to at least the dangerous modern foods associate by some to cause homosexuality - are significant enough (like monogamy
) to know for certain its not completely correlated to nutrition and certainly not modern nutrition. If you have WAPF or other traditional diet proponents blasting homosexuality, but not even acknowledging the different in raw and cooked to our original nutrition, you can only assume peoples are blind to the fact that there was homosexuality (and probably way larger percentages than are reported) prior to 1890. It can be argued that homosexuality in nature is a negative (or positive) as in self-regulating a species or natural poor nutrition due to unavailable food sources, but this doesn't seem to turn up completely with the data. I believe its possible, but then again this is really a separate thing than soy or any other modern food or information being such a heavy factor, even though I'd guess personally that a mother and father's intake could indeed bring about various results in a child's makeup.
Granted, if homosexuality was just another hormone disorder or even extreme issues such as autism, it is
possible that it could be corrected through nutrition, but all of these such disorders or Parkinsons etc...are known to exacerbate with age and are more reasonably linked in health communities as being due to other sources then genes. Again if there are next to no cases of people succumbing to homosexuality later in life in grouping with their diabetes, Crohn's, or Parkinsons, then we can only assume that poor diet can only disrupt the distribution of hormones and the exacerbation of behaviors and pathologies, not have an overall effect on orientation. Sure people can become really femmy from soy, but this does not mean a homosexual person is more toxic than another person which is ultimately what all this implies.
As for some of the other theories that homosexuals are just bisexuals or opportunists pre-practicing before women or something, this is so far out of touch I don't know where to begin, as ive never met a single gay dude at least that ever tried to switch teams, or mentioned wanting to nail broads or even actually impregnating a woman (as opposed to adoption) to arrive at a child. Women seem to be a bit more of an ambiguity for me personally so i've left them out for the most part, but I believe quite a few in the same way will not often wish to actually be impregnated 'naturally' by a man when they desire a child. Even if there are some holes here that could be disputed, the ties to diet in terms of having a concrete result on an already birthed human's orientation seem about as likely to me as me eventually wanting to mate with an animal due to my present diet inclinations.
