Hmm... There is something to be said for the tactical aproach wherein one flames every opponent. If she had posted scientific papers proving her point, then people would probably go off to the next thread and forget about this. Whoever, this (the flaming) ends the purpose of debate and raises the attention people will give to the subject. The remaining question is: Does this affect people coming across in a positive or negative manner? The problem with that question is that we cannot answer it by using the internet, since the existance of the silent crowd.
... How the hell do you back that one up? By scientific standards the full conception of romantic love is several different psychological, endocrinological and neurological processes happening at once, some which can happen entirely seperately and others which cause one another. It can be highly influenced by our psychological and rational decisions, sometimes.
"Love Is a Battlefield" is a Grammy Award-winning song written by Holly Knight and Mike Chapman, after Pat Benatar asked Chapman to write her a hit song. It was released as a single from Benatar's album Live from Earth. The single has been certified gold and is her highest charting single in the United States. It topped Billboard's Mainstream Rock Tracks chart for four weeks and made number five on the Billboard Hot 100 in December 1983. It topped the Australian singles chart for five weeks in 1984. The song was finally released in the United Kingdom in March 1985 and reached #17. It was awarded a Gold certification in Canada for sales of 5000 units
And yes..arousal is a choice as well and something we can control. As someone who has been married a looooooong time, the same thing that triggered your arousal a few years ago, may not do it for you anymore. Sex therapists often work with couples who have lost that "spark". Same penis. Same vagina. No arousal. Because it simply does not come from the vision of the penis, but the activation of a chemical process in anticipation of something else.
Work in a shelter some time of rape victims that absolutely had no arousal from their attacker, but do with their spouses or significant others. Because our mind activates differently based on memory, anticipation, mental attitude, fear, etc.
But I have always wondered why the homosexual activist even takes this approach. Why does it matter if it is a choice or not? If it was complete choice, wouldn't it still be just as equal a choice as heterosexuality? You hurt the cause by basically claiming that it is something less, but since there is no choice, people should be ok with it. Instead you should be saying that it doesn't matter if it is a choice or not, and people should just be ok with it.
"Work in a shelter some time of rape victims that absolutely had no arousal from their attacker, but do with their spouses or significant others. Because our mind activates differently based on memory, anticipation, mental attitude, fear, etc."
I'm failing to grasp the point you're trying to make here, Matt. Are you implying that sexual orientation being a natural, ingrained disposition means a person ought to be aroused by any person of the sex they're oriented to? And regardless of the circumstance?
I do wonder when you chose to be attracted to women, however, if you think all orientations are something we just pick out on a whim, like clothing.
Your never-ending stupidity continues to amaze me, and to think that you believe that you are in the right. I for one, think you are nothing but a petty troll. No one can be this fucking stupid and insipid.
I'm not arguing anything, as there is no arguing with a brick wall with nothing fucking behind it. It's just blank. The lights are on but no one's home, if you get my drift. (Which you probably don't, being dumber then a fucking brick.)
2. Thank you for making a statement of the blindingly obvious. I would think that if you've managed to get into an argument with somebody who has used this logic than you haven't the brain matter to realize that you are better off not trying.
1. No, but I wanted the extra attention, so sue me.
2. Its obviously not fucking obvious, you brain dead twat, or else we wouldn't have stupid worthless pieces of shit sharing their worthless shit opinions that they think people actually give two flying fucks about. Your brain matter is like a cancer, infecting those all around it with its stupidity. Its like Invasion of the fucking Body-Snatchers, but in real life and instead of cool aliens we get stupidity.
Its obviously not fucking obvious, you brain dead twat, or else we wouldn't have stupid worthless pieces of shit sharing their worthless shit opinions that they think people actually give two flying fucks about.
As I have not much input on this, because it's beating a dead horse, but if you want people to take you seriously, I do suggest using a lot calmer language and not fucking people out of it. It doesn't look good on you. That is all.
I'm just a very angry person, and get angry very easily. You can imagine that I'm easy to provoke. I don't believe my anger issues and lots of f-bombs lower the quality of my opinions, though. Were not children.