http://www.comcast.net/news/health/index.jsp?cat=HEALTHWELLNESS&fn=/2005/09/15/222549.html

Thu Sep 15, 10:49 PM UPDATED 22 HOURS 26 MINUTES AGO More women _ particularly those in their late teens and 20s _ are experimenting with bisexuality or at least feel more comfortable reporting same-sex encounters, according to a new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The survey, released Thursday by the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics, found that 11.5 percent of women, ages 18 to 44, said they've had at least one sexual experience with another woman in their lifetimes, compared with about 4 percent of women, ages 18 to 59, who said the same in a comparable survey a decade earlier.

For women in their late teens and 20s, the percentage rose to 14 percent in the more recent survey. About 6 percent of men in their teens and 20s said they'd had at least one same-sex encounter.

While those who conducted the survey took measures to protect respondents' privacy, researchers say it's unclear whether the figure for men was lower because they're are more likely to avoid same-sex experiences or whether they're not reporting them.

It wouldn't surprise Kat Fowler, a 27-year-old art student who dates both women and men, if men were less likely to talk about their experiences.

"There's a certain higher level of discrimination (for men). It's a lot easier for women to have these kinds of experiences and be open about it because it's more accepted," said Fowler, who attends the University of Florida.

The findings on bisexuality and other aspects of Americans' sexual habits were taken from the National Survey of Family Growth, which included 12,571 in-person interviews, done from March 2002 to March 2003. Overall, researchers said the report shows that most people have relatively few partners and are at a low risk for sexually transmitted diseases.

"Instead of just anecdotes and stories that raise people's anxieties, I think it's best to have real numbers," said William Mosher, the statistician who oversaw the report. "And now we have those."

When it comes to women and same-sex relationships, Mosher said it would be worth studying why young women seek such relationships, and whether they may be trying to avoid diseases more commonly spread through sex with men.

But some experts who study sexuality say it's even more likely that many college students simply see experimentation as a rite of passage.

"It's very safe in the academic community; no one thinks anything of it," said Elayne Rapping, a professor of American studies at the University of Buffalo who has written about sexuality.

"But to some extent there's more talk than action," she added, noting that the bisexuality label has become a "badge of courage" for some college women, even those who only date men. Meanwhile, she said, men who have same-sex experiences are often less likely to talk about it publicly.

The trend among college women has prompted some sexual behavior experts to light-heartedly refer to the term "LUG," or "lesbian until graduation," said Craig Kinsley, a neuroscientist at the University of Richmond who studies the biology of sexual orientation and gender.


Another "fad" we can thank the jews for. :mad:

the bisexuality label has become a "badge of courage" for some college women, even those who only date men.

A badge of courage? Not quite. I wonder how many do this because it turns guy on.

A badge of courage? Not quite. I wonder how many do this because it turns guy on.I would guess that almost all women who do it, do it because they think it turns guys on. With the huge success of the Girls Gone Wild series, and other videos of that nature, is it really any surprise that so many women think that being "bi" is the way to land a man?

A badge of courage? Not quite. I wonder how many do this because it turns guy on.


I don't know where this bullshit myth came from that there's anything arousing to a man about lesb. . . oh, yeah, JEWS. Never mind. Seriously, that's the stupidest jew-produced "turn-on" I've heard of. While I don't share the same visceral disgust for lesbians as I do for fags, there's certainly nothing arousing about lesbos, despite what jewtv would have people believe. Although I'm certain a number of young men have bought into that jew bs and now believe or act like they believe such is arousing, for the same reason many Whites act so vehemently like they hate us "Nazis," they desperately want to hate us so as to fit in with what they believe they're supposed to do. They desperately want to find dykes appealing because they believe they're supposed to, that everyone else does, and they fear they may be "abnormal" for not finding it appealing. Weak fucking lemmings.

Most guys I know find lesbos gross.
One time me and my beau saw two decent looking lesbos kissing on the street, (they love to show off) still grossed us out though we both commented how they were cute. Most lesbo's are pretty disgusting and not like the ones shown on that show "the L word".

I think guys like watching chicks pet themselves or each other but I am not sure if watch two chicks go at it with a ditto is a real turn on for them. I believe the porn industry started that myth.

Actual lebsians are repulsive to heterosexual men at least most men.
I think what titillates straight men is the idea of straight girls doing a scene of girl-girl, at least that is what Penthouse and the porn industry seems to think.

I feel lesbains, the real kind, are a distinct threat to the health of society even more so than homosexual males. I have seen families broken up by women who are mothers and wives seduced into the "lifestyle", the resulting tragedies are contributory to the destruction of our culture and our race.

Let's face it without reproduction our species goes extinct and when existing families are corrupted by these predators then the children of the original mating are at risk.

That said I don't necessarily feel that the idea of girls playing before or after they are involved with a male is ipso facto horrible, after all by what authority does one judge that? Unless one is Muslim or Christian I don't think paganism finds sexual dalliances immoral, on their face. It is merely a sideshow to the main event, male-female coupling which results in the furtherance of our species.

I think that idea of women with women is what the heterosexual males that do indicate a favorable view of such would be thinking of when they respond to polls.

That said I don't necessarily feel that the idea of girls playing before or after they are involved with a male is ipso facto horrible, after all by what authority does one judge that? Unless one is Muslim or Christian I don't think paganism finds sexual dalliances immoral, on their face. It is merely a sideshow to the main event, male-female coupling which results in the furtherance of our species.



I thought pagans used sex to built energy and that is why they were a bit looser in those morals. Pagans use it for loose pleasure?

I thought pagans used sex to built energy and that is why they were a bit looser in those morals. Pagans use it for loose pleasure?

Shocking I know. I think there is validity to the "energy" aspect, see Tantra for instance, but pagans enjoyed sex like Americans enjoy cheeseburgers and negroball.

Most guys I know and have known seemed to be quite fascinated by the thought of two women getting it on, provided they are not fat and disgusting and actually do look like women.

Shocking I know. I think there is validity to the "energy" aspect, see Tantra for instance, but pagans enjoyed sex like Americans enjoy cheeseburgers and negroball.

er, okay. Maybe I should repraise the question....

Do pagans believe in sexual pleasure in terms of multiple partners and/or group situations?

I hung with some Bhagwaners, (what I call Devotees of the late Indian mystic Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh) , a couple of times in my life through chance. They had me in an early morning 'naked' group meditation scene once. A lot of sitting and jumping with eyes closed, men and women. After wards we sat together drinking strong spice tea talking about relationships. I felt they recognized that I was in a bad relationship at the time and were trying to pull me into their club. A good looking chick like me always had to watch for the wolves. I think they wanted a new play toy in the house. They were never real clear on what sex situations they allowed to flourish but later ( I worked with a couple of bhagwaners who ran a business)I got the feeling it was a ‘free love, free sex’ kinda thing. lol.

And I hope you are not implying we yanks don't like sex? I beg to differ. :D

Being bisexual is the new fad, nothing more.

It's usually the trendy conformist goth-girls who think they're being untrendy and nonconformist who claim they're bisexuals.

I can do little but roll my eyes at them. Toolz for the Jooz.

er, okay. Maybe I should repraise the question....

Do pagans believe in sexual pleasure in terms of multiple partners and/or group situations?

I hung with some Bhagwaners, (what I call Devotees of the late Indian mystic Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh) , a couple of times in my life through chance. They had me in an early morning 'naked' group meditation scene once. A lot of sitting and jumping with eyes closed, men and women. After wards we sat together drinking strong spice tea talking about relationships. I felt they recognized that I was in a bad relationship at the time and were trying to pull me into their club. A good looking chick like me always had to watch for the wolves. I think they wanted a new play toy in the house. They were never real clear on what sex situations they allowed to flourish but later ( I worked with a couple of bhagwaners who ran a business)I got the feeling it was a ‘free love, free sex’ kinda thing. lol.

And I hope you are not implying we yanks don't like sex? I beg to differ. :D

Damn if this isnt one of the most amusing anecdotes I have ever read on this forum. I have met soldiers, lawyers, professors, mechanics, computer geeks at VNN, but never a former "nudebogwarmer," my heavens! I thank you Jane for a hearty laugh!

I don't know where this bullshit myth came from that there's anything arousing to a man about lesb. . . oh, yeah, JEWS. Never mind. Seriously, that's the stupidest jew-produced "turn-on" I've heard of. While I don't share the same visceral disgust for lesbians as I do for fags, there's certainly nothing arousing about lesbos, despite what jewtv would have people believe. Although I'm certain a number of young men have bought into that jew bs and now believe or act like they believe such is arousing, for the same reason many Whites act so vehemently like they hate us "Nazis," they desperately want to hate us so as to fit in with what they believe they're supposed to do. They desperately want to find dykes appealing because they believe they're supposed to, that everyone else does, and they fear they may be "abnormal" for not finding it appealing. Weak fucking lemmings.

It's about time someone addressed this bit of prevalent nonsense. For those who think that some of us engage in hyperbole when we say that most people would doubt the laws of natural science if the propasphere proclaimed them to be false, this is a perfect example. I am heartened that Mr. Flynn disposed of this silliness with great dispatch and cogency. He said it much better than I could have.

I have actually been in the presence of a roomful of 'manly-men' who called me a 'fucking homo' when I told them that I was disgusted by the thought of two women doing unnatural things to one another.

On a related note, what's considered 'hot' is also imposed upon the herd with breathtaking presumption. Julia Roberts, who looks like a fish with chicken legs, and is slightly less attractive than Eric Roberts, is proclaimed to be 'hawt' by the jew PR boys, and male America responds in pavlovian fashion. Angelina Jolie, who looks like a cross between Vladimir Putin and Wesley Snipes, is similarly pronounced by ukase of the Kosher Kommissariat to be the official poster girl of the one-handed commandos, and the American male obediently proceeds in lock step to spank the pet nigger.

American women are no less robotic. Ladies, did you ever take a good look at Hunk-by-Jew-diktat Leonardo Dicaprio, especially around the eyes? He looks like he could play a Klingon on 'Star Trek', blissfully unencumbered by make up. How 'bout Matt Damon or his mule-faced side kick Mr. J-lo, who would be almost as handsome as Adam Sandler or that hook-nosed guy from 'American Pie' with a little plastic surgery? Are these really YOUR idea of good-looking men?

Leonardo Dicaprio looks like a skinny, nerdy, femmy, 15 year old boy. Adam Sandler is a Jew and looks like one, enough said there. But Matt Damon is not bad.

I have actually been in the presence of a roomful of 'manly-men' who called me a 'fucking homo' when I told them that I was disgusted by the thought of two women doing unnatural things to one another.

I have heard many women say that a guy who is not turned on by two bi females going at it is gay. :rolleyes:

Just another attempt to keep the white race from reproducing. At about the time we stopped watching TV you couldn't find a show without gays in it, and every one of them were white. I can't remember a TV show that had mud gays.

Now it's considered cool and hip for white girls to mess around with each other. While they're experimenting they're not having white babies and that's what the jews want.

I have heard many women say that a guy who is not turned on by two bi females going at it is gay.

Just out of idle curiosity, do any of these women think that any woman repelled by the sight of two faggots tearing each other new (ly enlarged) assholes must be a lesbian? :D

For a lot of the guys that I have talked to about this, it seems to not be so much about the two women going at it that turns them on, but more the thought of possibly being able to get two women in their bed at the same time.

Now it's considered cool and hip for white girls to mess around with each other. While they're experimenting they're not having white babies and that's what the jews want.

What the hell can possibly cause a girl, who does not truly have any gay "tendencies" to want to mess around with another girl? Even if she believes it is somehow "hip" or will turn guys on? The thought is truly repulsive. I don't get it. But then again, I gave up trying to understand why some people do what they do, a long time ago.


Just out of idle curiosity, do any of these women think that any woman repelled by the sight of two faggots tearing each other new (ly enlarged) assholes must be a lesbian?
I have asked about that, and the response usually is "it is just different" LOL

What the hell can possibly cause a girl, who does not truly have any gay "tendencies" to want to mess around with another girl? Even if she believes it is somehow "hip" or will turn guys on? The thought is truly repulsive. I don't get it. But then again, I gave up trying to understand why some people do what they do, a long time ago.


I think because to some of these women being popular and the center of attention is more important than anything else. So if it's cool to be with a black guy, they will, if it's cool to screw around with other women, then they will.

I think when they get up in the morning they look at MTV and see what's popular today, then they do their best to make it happen. Just like politicians do with CNN.

I would guess that almost all women who do it, do it because they think it turns guys on. With the huge success of the Girls Gone Wild series, and other videos of that nature, is it really any surprise that so many women think that being "bi" is the way to land a man?

Ive had a number of men tell me lesbianism turns them on.

How many people here have read KD Rebel where David Lane suggested that females are naturally bisexual? Check it out on White Revolution's site if you've never seen it.



The trap is set....

How many people here have read KD Rebel where David Lane suggested that females are naturally bisexual? Check it out on White Revolution's site if you've never seen it. I haven't read it, but it is something that I've heard before. Quite honestly, I think it's bullshit.

I do think that some people just happen to be born gay (i.e. genetically defective), but certainly not the amount that currently claim to be gay. If the media didn't hype up the gay lifestyle as something to be "proud" of, I can almost guarantee that the number of people who'd claim to be gay would be only a microscopic fraction of the current number.

I haven't read it, but it is something that I've heard before. Quite honestly, I think it's bullshit.

I do think that some people just happen to be born gay (i.e. genetically defective), but certainly not the amount that currently claim to be gay. If the media didn't hype up the gay lifestyle as something to be "proud" of, I can almost guarantee that the number of people who'd claim to be gay would be only a microscopic fraction of the current number.


You passed the test, and avoided the trap. About a year ago when I and a few others raised complaints about the bizzare sexual overtones in KD Rebel we were shouted down as traitors on this very board. Thankfully a lot of the critics were WR cronies so they're gone now.

I do think that some people just happen to be born gay (i.e. genetically defective), but certainly not the amount that currently claim to be gay. If the media didn't hype up the gay lifestyle as something to be "proud" of, I can almost guarantee that the number of people who'd claim to be gay would be only a microscopic fraction of the current number.

I think that is true with the whole girl/bisexual thing for many of them. Though, as I already said, I still cannot even begin to understand how any amount of indoctrination of the whole idea that the gay lifestyle is something to be proud of, or trendy can possibly possess someone who is completely straight to engage in that behavior. The idea that guys like it is what ultimately pushes it over the edge I think. But then, that even gets back to the same source, for the most part. I have heard the idea a lot that all women are naturally bisexual, and I think that idea finds believers, usually among men who want to believe it. Every male that I personally know, who has said that seems to say it with a big cheesy grin on their face. LOL :rolleyes:

Though I think this is true, with bisexuality, I do not think it is true in any significant numbers with lesbians or especially homosexual men. Even among lesbians or male homos the number of people who claim to be gay would go down without all the "media hype" but mostly because if it was no longer cool or acceptable, they would go back in the closet, where they belong.

The herd acts the way it's told.

People that can be convinced Julia Roberts is attractive can be convinced of anything.

I thought pagans used sex to built energy and that is why they were a bit looser in those morals. Pagans use it for loose pleasure?

That depends on what kind of Pagans you mean, i know for a fact a true (Female) Ásatrúar would not have sex before marriage, unless they're part of some Freya cult :rolleyes:

I think bisexuality among Aryan women is a sort of mainstay.

Most of my Aryan married friends have a bisexual wife, and they are very aware of it. Some of them swing with other women and their wife in the same bed.

It is almost considered the norm.

Get over it.

If this is not true of you and your wife, then it was not written about you and your wife but about others and their wives, so it is not about you.

Just remember this. You aren't going to stop it no matter what you do or say or even if you stomp the floor and cry.

Get over it.

You aren't going to stop it no matter what you do or say or even if you stomp the floor and cry.
The same could be said for you and your ranting about how you want Alex to censor his forum. :rolleyes:

Surely, you have something better to do with your time and your personal memory chips than to follow me around VNN and comment each time I say something.

Are you looking for a date, perhaps?

Just asking.

PS: How do you dye your eyes to get them all white like that?

Surely, you have something better to do with your time and your personal memory chips than to follow me around VNN and comment each time I say something.You're posting in a thread that I started, genius.

Are you looking for a date, perhaps?

I'm quite married. But, even if I wasn't, you're not my type.
PS: How do you dye your eyes to get them all white like that?
I can't tell you. It's a trade secret.

Pixi, tell that lazy husband of yours that I am very disappointed with his apparent lack of progress. He'll know of what I speak, and almost certainly hang his head in shame.

Haha, I just looked at his profile. Here I thought you guys were like 40, and it turns out that he is just lately out of his teens. A mere runt of a lad, he is.

I have to figure out how to make my eyes white like yours.

I figure I'll be your type once I make the transition.

Oh, baby...

:box:

I have to figure out how to make my eyes white like yours.

Here's a hint: It involves swallowing from all of the bottles under the sink.

Get drinkin'!

I figure I'll be your type once I make the transition.

LOL. Not quite.

I swallowed everything under the sink last week.

How much longer until my eyes turn white?

It better happen soon, because I have to go to work.

:box:

That's odd.

I suppose you didn't have any Clorox under the sink, eh?

Most of my Aryan married friends have a bisexual wife, and they are very aware of it. Some of them swing with other women and their wife in the same bed.

Uh, maybe you should choose your friends a little more wisely.

I choose my friends very wisely. It's just that their wives tend to be bisexual and their husbands sort of get off on it or don't seem to mind.

Tell me you are NOT one of those white movement sexual prudes... Please...

What a bummer that sexually prudish narrow road is.

It doesn't make you more white to be a narrow-minded prude about others.

They are just as white as anyone else. Whiteness is not depleted by sexual behavior or negated by it. If you are white, you are white. Period.

As for the clorox, I drank all I had, but it was only 3 quarts.

Should I order more? Or should I wear reading glasses when I am swallowing the Clorox?

Oh, baby...

:box:

You guys really are quite awkward when it comes to trading banter, aren't you? This is almost as insufferably boring as those zany fat-jokes.

I can honestly say that I have never known one married couple who practice such things. And I really don't care all that much about what people do in their sexual life, but if saying that keeping sexual relations between the husband and wife, and not allowing everyone in the neighborhood to hop in bed with you for a big orgy, is a more healthy and moral lifestyle means I am a prude, then so be it.

Don't let your healthy lifestyle end with never hopping in bed with a second partner in your marriage.

There are a ton of other ways your health is being threatened such as:

Visiting the supermarket where hundreds of people with diseases go to feel your food with their hands dripping with bacteria and viruses.

Using doorknobs with tons of bacteria and viruses on them.

Using a public bathroom where the sinks and facets are loaded with germs and fecal matter.

Visiting a bar for a beer in a glass that is only washed for a single second in soapy water so that virus and germs are all over the lip.

Drinking bottled water with virus and germs inside.

Trusting that your husband hasn't had unprotected sex with a prostitute then finding out you have a social disease somehow.

Drinking from a religious chalice with germs all over it.

Eating fats, oils, meats, fish, cheese, milk, and other high protein / high fat foods instead of sticking with fruits, vegetables, and starches for a healthier body.

Going to the office, school, or other public place and practicing the nervous habit of picking your nose, wiping your eyes with hands that touched the desk, scratching your ear, touching your lips with your fingers, and other neurotic little gestures you do minute-by-minute and which threaten your health.

Visiting the doctor's office where germs are all over the chairs, magazines, and tables and where sick people are sneezing out particles of infection into the air filled with diseases that they came to the doctor for.

I think it suffices to say that a lesbian in your bed now and then would endanger you alot less than a trip to the store during a pandemic.

Don't think I am advocating this, but as the Devil's Advocate, I wanted to point out the foibles of your argument. Your health is under stress from ALL of the above things that you could care less about.

It's a bit hypocritical to mention a bisexual woman in your bedroom as a disease threat when you could care less about these far more dangerous and hazardous activities that you and others probably practice minute-by-minute.

Have a nice day. Heed the above list and stay healthy.

:box:

You can flip on HBO JEWTV at 2 am and see two women getting down,but
you wont see one male choking on some other males 10 inch rod.

Must be that women are pretty ...

Don't let your healthy lifestyle end with never hopping in bed with a second partner in your marriage.

There are a ton of other ways your health is being threatened such as:

Visiting the supermarket where hundreds of people with diseases go to feel your food with their hands dripping with bacteria and viruses.

Using doorknobs with tons of bacteria and viruses on them.

Using a public bathroom where the sinks and facets are loaded with germs and fecal matter.

Visiting a bar for a beer in a glass that is only washed for a single second in soapy water so that virus and germs are all over the lip.

Drinking bottled water with virus and germs inside.

Trusting that your husband hasn't had unprotected sex with a prostitute then finding out you have a social disease somehow.

Drinking from a religious chalice with germs all over it.

Eating fats, oils, meats, fish, cheese, milk, and other high protein / high fat foods instead of sticking with fruits, vegetables, and starches for a healthier body.

Going to the office, school, or other public place and practicing the nervous habit of picking your nose, wiping your eyes with hands that touched the desk, scratching your ear, touching your lips with your fingers, and other neurotic little gestures you do minute-by-minute and which threaten your health.

Visiting the doctor's office where germs are all over the chairs, magazines, and tables and where sick people are sneezing out particles of infection into the air filled with diseases that they came to the doctor for.

I think it suffices to say that a lesbian in your bed now and then would endanger you alot less than a trip to the store during a pandemic.

Don't think I am advocating this, but as the Devil's Advocate, I wanted to point out the foibles of your argument. Your health is under stress from ALL of the above things that you could care less about.

It's a bit hypocritical to mention a bisexual woman in your bedroom as a disease threat when you could care less about these far more dangerous and hazardous activities that you and others probably practice minute-by-minute.

Have a nice day. Heed the above list and stay healthy.

:box:

Yes, that there sure was a textbook example of dismantling an opponent's assertions via equal parts common sense and clever analogy.

HG, I know you're not talking about me.

The herd acts the way it's told.

People that can be convinced Julia Roberts is attractive can be convinced of anything.

Aren't Erica and Julia chosenites?

I don't read Lane although I am aware he has written on polygamy and other non-standard WN topics in the past.

I think there needs to be a distinction made between bull daggers and bisexual girls or rather girls who are comfortable with menage a trois for example.

Muslims and Christians can point to their scriptures for prohibtions on such play but if one is a non-believer why embrace their viewpoints?

Women's sexuality has a plasticity that is rather remarkable, which is why it has been feared by males for such a great and varied part of history.

You've obviously never seen Oz. You didn't miss much.

Way too much man ass and outright bonesmuggling on that show.
I hit the remote control in about 100 nano seconds to get that off the JEWTV,
when I came across Oz; Its like being in
west hollywood.

It's a bit hypocritical to mention a bisexual woman in your bedroom as a disease threat when you could care less about these far more dangerous and hazardous activities that you and others probably practice minute-by-minute.

Have a nice day. Heed the above list and stay healthy.

:box:


I find your response lacking. You are assuming we are a bunch of dumbshits who don't know the things you listed above. I know all those things and still don't allow more 'clean' partners in my bedroom. I also know that curing the STDs may be a bit more difficult than lets say curing something you catch through normal daily activities.

I think you are talking through your hat and ain't even had the threesome but just dream about it like all young men. Not many men can handle two women in bed. :cool:

Thats why Gang Bangs are many men and one woman;
If its two woman that really turn you one,
they can end up being pleased, if you put your mind to it,
well guess it would take more then just gray matter.



-- "Disease Threat" --

How does two women at once increase a disease threat
over having them one at a time.
Your going to do the same thing with them one or two at a
time.
Well it might lessen the "disease threat" if you cant
take care of second woman.

Why is it that always woman are the "disease threat" ??

It's just that their wives tend to be bisexual and their husbands sort of get off on it or don't seem to mind.

Just because a woman will do things with another woman to make her man happy does not mean that she is bisexual. If a woman were truly bisexual, she would be equally as likely to get it on with a woman as with a man, whether or not a man were present.

The most one could say with certainty is that her behavior is bisexual, and again, even that is questionable if she will only act that way if a man is around.

It's certainly not my place to judge what other married people do, but as far as I'm concerned, bringing another person into the marriage bed is cheating. If everyone involved is okay with it, then good for them.

I think bisexuality among Aryan women is a sort of mainstay. Most of my Aryan married friends have a bisexual wife, and they are very aware of it. Some of them swing with other women and their wife in the same bed. It is almost considered the norm.
.......

Yes we all read the article from the St Louis newspaper about how you years ago you used to live with a gay Jew. So I understand that you may have personal interest in normalizing Homosexuality. Normal Whites do not. Bisexual wives are NOT THE NORM. Except for perverts and jews perhaps.

..........
Women's sexuality has a plasticity that is rather remarkable, which is why it has been feared by males for such a great and varied part of history.

That's true to some extent.

I don't really spend to much time worrying about people who have had incidental homosexual experiences. Particularly in this age where the Jewish televitz is constantly encouraging people to act out homosexual scenarios.

But we will NEVER accept the normalization of homosexual practice. That kills the tribe. We WILL stigmatize homosexuality and keep it that way. Do you want to know why?

If we dont it harms our TRIBE. Now known as our RACE. Take a look at the ancient Greeks and Romans. Yes they knew that pederasty and homosexuality were damaging to the tribe. Yes they knew that an adequate reproductive rate in society depends on normal heterosexual monogamy being the norm. And yet they tolerated these vices and became decadent and weak or in the case of the Spartans, merely outnumbered.

Whether or not ten or twenty percent of girls have drunkenly smooched other girls at a party in college is not really news. The Jews play it like news because they are always trying to knock down traditional sex roles along with class and caste and tribal and national barriers. They assail marriage and the family as a way of weakening Gentiles. They do this by subverting social norms and tabboos and replacing them with perversion and decadence. This is yet another genocidal crime by Jews against the very fabric of society and why they must never be tolerated and must be fought with force. They are a contagion, that threatens the most fundamental building blocks of a healthy society. They are a solvent that threatens to destroy the cellular walls of our blood and our nation and our very families. We have to destroy them first.

I am not really telling you folks something you dont understand already. And YET, The "true Jew" of YHWH from St Louis is singing the Jew's tune in this thread, why am I not surprised? Which side are you on?

Yes we all read the article from the St Louis newspaper about how you years ago you used to live with a gay Jew. So I understand that you may have personal interest in normalizing Homosexuality. Normal Whites do not. Bisexual wives are NOT THE NORM. Except for perverts and jews perhaps.

Check this out from the VNN Archives:

Intro to Sexual Liberation as Political Control
http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/lettersOct-Nov03/120403jonesintro.htm
by E. Michael Jones

4 December 2003

Introduction: Internet in Gaza: Sexual Liberation as Political Control

Ask for this great Deliverer now, and find him
Eyeless in Gaza at the Mill with slaves,
Himself in bonds under Philistian yoke;

John Milton, Samson Agonistes

London 1996

Since Internet knows no place, it doesn't really matter where it happened, but just for the record I was in England when I started getting e-mail messages from Lisa and Heather. At least, I think that's what their names were. They wanted me to check out their hot web sites. Just as there is no place on the Internet, the names don't mean much either. The important thing was that I was getting unsolicited solicitations for pornography. Spam is, I think, the generic term for this unsolicited material. The pornographic variations are knows as blue spam. I was planning to protest to Compuserve and ask them not to make my name available to these agencies when I got some blue spam from Compuserve itself, offering its own pornographic services. Quis cutodiet ipsos custodes? What sells itself as an e-mail service turns out to be a pimp. The situation I have since learned is even worse with AOL, according to one subscriber to that on-line service, who spends each day clearing his electronic mailbox of hundreds of such solicitations. In the recent court case challenging the constitutionality of the Communications Decency Act, Compuserve signed an amicus curiae brief supporting the pornographers. Predictably, given our judicial system, the three-judge panel in Philadelphia handling the case found the CDA unconstitutional. One of the judges opined that "just as the strength of the Internet is chaos, so the strength of our liberty depends upon the chaos and cacophony of unfettered speech." The word "liberty" coming from one of the regime's mandarins is a dead giveaway that what we're really talking about here is bondage. What I would like to propose here is a paradigm shift of simple but nonetheless revolutionary (or better still counter-revolutionary proportions) by saying what should be obvious to anyone who has visited these web pages and who has had Heather or Lisa ask for his credit card number, namely, that pornography is now and has always been a form of control, financial control. Pornography is a way of getting people to give you money which, because of the compulsive nature of the transaction, is not unlike trafficking in drugs. Unlike prostitution, which is also a transaction benefiting from compulsion, pornography is closely bound up with technology, specifically the reproduction and transmission of images. Just as the history of pornography is one of the progress (technological, not moral progress, of course), so the exploitation of compulsion has been explored in more and more explicit form during the past two hundred years of this revolutionary age. What began as the bondage of sin eventually became financial control and what became accepted as a financial transaction has been forged into a form of political control. Sexual revolution is contemporareous with political revolution of the sort that began in France in 1789. This means we are not talking about sexual vice when we use the term sexual revolution, as much as the rationalization of sexual vice, followed by the financial exploitation of sexual vice, followed by the political mobilization of the same thing as a form of control. Since sexual "liberation" has social chaos as one of its inevitable sequelae, sexual liberation begets almost from the moment of its inception the need for social control. That dynamic is the subject of this book.

It is no secret now that lust is also a form of addiction. My point here is that the current regime knows this and exploits this situation to its own advantage In other words, sexual "freedom" is really a form of social control. What we are really talking about is a Gnostic system of two truths. The exoteric truth, the one propagated by the regime through advertising, sex education, Hollywood films, and the university system -- the truth, in other words, for general consumption -- is that sexual liberation is freedom. The esoteric truth, the one that informs the operations manual of the regime -- in other words the people who benefit from "liberty" -- is the exact opposite, namely, that sexual liberation is a form of control, a way of maintaining the regime in power by exploiting the passions of the naive, who identify with the regime which ostensibly enables them to gratify these passions. People who succumb to their disordered passions are then given rationalizations of the sort that clog web pages on the Internet and are thereby molded into a powerful political force by those who are most expert in manipulating the flow of imagery and rationalization.

Like laissez-faire economics, the first tentative ideas of how to exploit sex as a form of social control arose during the Enlightenment as well. If the universe was a mechanism whose prime force was gravity, society was a machine as well whose prime force was self-interest, and man, likewise, no longer sacred, was a machine whose engine ran on passion. From there it was not much of a stretch to understand that the man who controlled passion controlled man.

John Heidenry's history of the sexual revolution, What Wild Ecstasy, is one more example of whiggish history -- this time, whiggish sexual history. In fact, all histories of sexual liberation are whiggish. The moral of each piece of this genre is either "People everywhere just wanna be free" or, to give the feminist variant, "Girls just wanna have fun." That Linda Boreman Marchiano, AKA, Linda Lovelace found getting beaten and raped during the filming of Deep Throat not much fun is beside the point. The dogma that needs to be promoted here is that sexual license is liberating, and that the quest for liberation is its own justification, so even if a few people get hurt (or killed) in the process, it was generally worth it after all.

Heidenry lays his metaphysical cards on the table at various points during the book. At the very beginning he tells us, for example, that "this....is the way we wre from about 1965 on, when the particles of revolt and enlightenment coalesced into a sexual Big Bang."1 We have here, in other words, the classic Enlightenment explanation of everything. Just as the entire physical universe in all its grandeur, beauty and order is really nothing more than the random motion of discrete particles bumping into each other, so every social movement from economics to sexual liberation is essentially the same thing. The same explanation that George Will applies to the economic order, John Heidenry applies to the moral and sexual realm. Instead of atoms, we have atomistic individuals; instead of gravity, we have passion as the great motivating force, and instead of an orderly universe explainable by the laws of physics, we have society reconfigured by social movements like sexual liberation. This is how it is; in other words, the big picture. People everywhere just wanna be free and what gesture could encapsulate this freedom more than, say, masturbating to the dirty pictures in Hustler?

As the last example makes clear, we are not talking about freedom here but a form of addiction or moral bondage -- certainly for the individual but also for the culture as well. Which brings us back to the dishonesty of Heidenry's book. The sexual revolution was not a grassroots uprising; it was not the coalescing of "particles of revolt and enlightenment"; it was rather a decision on the part of the ruling class in France, Russia, Germany and the United States at various points during the last 200 years to tolerate sexual behavior outside of marriage as a form of insurrection and then as a form of political control. Heidenry's book is part of the general mystification on this subject and so not something that will explain things to the unwary: however, it is worthwhile as a classic expression of how sexual liberation has worked as a form of political control in this country over the past thirty-two years. Bernard Berelson, who worked for the Rockefellers, was a student of the Enlightenment and put those ideas to work in manipulating public opinion for them during the '60s, most specifically in their battle with the Catholic Church over the decriminalization of contraception. Edward Bernays was the nephew of Sigmund Freud and the father of modern advertising. Both were part of the Illuminist tradition of controlling people through their passions, without the knowledge of the person being controlled. And of all the passions the Illuminists make clear -- the sexual passions are the most effetive when it comes to controlling man.

What Heidenry's book shows is how this control takes place not in theory but in practice. Given the wounded state of human nature after the Fall, flooding a country with pornography means getting a certain number of people hooked on it, just as flooding a country with drugs will result in a certain percentage of addiction. Once people are hooked, the culture's mandarins can use the details of their addictions against anyone who goes against the regime. The subtext of Heidenry's book is that everyone who opposes sexual liberation will be punished. "Several of pornography's most outspoken enemies," he actually says at one point in the book, "had come to an unhappy end."2 What he fails to tell us is that the unhappy end he describes is just a veiled way of talking about how sexual license is used as a form of political control.

So to give the best known examples cited in Heidenry's book, Preachers Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker were brought down by sexual scandals. Heidenry even admits that Bakker's interlude with Jessica Hahn was a set up but refuses to understand the implications of the facts he brings forth. Nor does he mention the fact of Hahn's seduction of Bakker was portrayed as Bakker's seduction of Hahn in a way calculated to destroy his ministry and the ministries of other televangelists at the time. If Heidenry were a consistent proponent of sexual liberation, he would applaud both Jimmy Swaggart's interlude with a prostitute, a visit clearly motivated by his exposure to pornography, and Bakker's extramarital sex with Jessica Hahn. But that is precisely what he does not do, and the only explanation that makes any sense out of this double standard is that an act of "sexual liberation" is in reality a potential form of political control and only has meaning in light of the politics of the person who commits it. Just why is what Jimmy Swaggart did bad, when Larry Flynt does the same thing and is applauded as a hero when he does it? The answer to that question is political. Jimmy Swaggart was on the wrong side of the political equation, and so could be marginalized by being exposed in Penthouse as a hypocrite.

Heidenry's motivation in this is clear enough. He was raised a Catholic the scion of the family that brought out B. Herder, the American branch of the Germany Catholic publisher, some time after the outbreak of World War I. Heidenry, after a conservative Catholic upbringing, ended up working for Penthouse, and a book like this can be seen as a rationalization of the moral and religious decisions he has made along the way. But the story doesn't stop there. People with Kinsey-like compulsions are put to use by people who can benefit politically from a world in which morals are devalued and money takes the place of morals as the arbiter of social interaction. Those who succumb to sexual addiction but refuse to go along will be outed. Those who refuse to go along but do not have sexual skeletons in their closets will be patronized and ignored. Those who go along with the ideology of sexual liberation, however, can do what they damn well please sexually because in going along they are under the sexual control of the controllers anyway.

The whole system Heidenry praises so dishonestly is based on a double standard which Heidenry exploits but will not acknowledge. Heidenry cites the Jimmy Swaggart expose in Penthouse in all of its lurid detail. Conspicuous by its absence from Heidenry's book was the equally lurid Penthouse expose of Bill Clinton's affair with Gennifer Flowers. If Penthouse is a credible source worth mentioning for the first story, why isn't it mentioned in the second? The answer is obvious. It serves no political purpose to attack President Clinton because he supports sexual liberation, which is to say the vehicle the dominant culture uses to exercise hegemony over its citizens. The regime first promotes sexual addiction in the name of liberation, then exploits it as a form of control. It then uses it to destroy anyone of sufficient prominence who refuses to go along.

As a variation on the same theme, let me propose the following thought experiment. Try to imagine the reaction of the press if Kenneth Starr or Senator Jesse Helms were caught soliciting an undercover agent in a public men's room. Now try to imagine the reaction of the press if Barney Frank were to do the same thing. Why the huge reaction in the first instance, and the non-reaction (when Frank's roommate was atually caught running a homosexual prostitution ring out of his home) in the second? Why is the same act both heinous and liberatory at one and the same time, depending on the politics of who does it? The answer is simple: Sexual liberation is a form of political control. Frank and Clinton are immune because they go along; Swaggart is destroyed for doing the same thing that makes Larry Flynt a cultural hero. The only thing that saves Starr or Helms from a fate similar to that of Swaggart and Bakker is the life each leads.

What follows is the history of an idea. The idea that sexual liberation could be used as a form of control is not a new idea. It lies at the heart of the story of Samson and Delilah. The idea that sin was a form of slavery was central to the writings of St. Paul. St. Augustine in his magnum opus in defense of Christianity against the accusations of the pagans that it contributed to the fall of Rome, divided the world into two cities, the City of God, which loves God to the extinction of self, and the City of Man, which loves self to the extinction of God. Augustine describes the City of Man as "lusting to dominate the world" but at the same time "itself dominated by its passion for domination."3 Libido Dominandi, passion for domination, then, is a paradoxical project, practiced invariably by people who are themselves in thrall to the same passions they incite in others to dominate them.

The dichotomy Augustine describes is eternal. It will exist at least as long as man exists. The revolutionaries of the Enlightenment created no new world, nor did they create a new man to populate their brave new world. What they did was adopt the worldview of Augustine and then reverse its values. "The state of the moral man is one of tranquility and peace, the state of an immoral man is one of perpetual unrest."4 The author of that statement was not St. Augustine (although he would have wholeheartedly agreed with it); it was Marquis de Sade. I mention this to show that both Augustine and the Marquis de Sade shared the same anthropology and the same rational psychology, if you will. Where they differed was the values they attributed to the truths of those sciences. For Augustine, motion was bad; for de Sade, the revolutionary, the perpetual motion caused by unruly passions was good because it perpetuates "the necessary insurrection in which the republican must always keep the government of which he is a member."5

The same could be said of freedom. What the one called freedom, the other called bondage. But the dichotomy of the two cities -- one abasing the self because of its love of God, the other abasing God because of its love of the self and its desires -- is something that both could agree upon.

What follows is the history of a project born out of the Enlightenment's inversion of Christian truths. "Even those who set themselves up against you," Augustine writes, addressing the Almighty in the Confessions, "do but copy you in a perverse way." The same could be said of the Enlightenment, which began as a movement to liberate man and almost overnight turned into a project to control him. This book is the story of that transformation. It can be construed as a history of the sexual revolution or a history of modern psychology or a history of psychological warfare. What all of these histories have in common is a transgenerational project that would come by way of trial and error and with an intention perverted by passion to the same conclusions that Augustine reached at the end of the Roman Empre. A man has as many masters as he has vices. By promoting vice, the regime promotes slavery, which can be fashioned into a form of political control. The only question which remained was whether that slavery can be harnessed for financial and political gain and, if it could, how to do it. The best way to control man is to do so without his awareness that he is being controlled, and the best way to do that is through the systematic manipulation of the passions, because man tends to identify his passions as his own. In defending them he defends his "freedom," which he usually sees as the unfettered ability to fulfill his desires, without, for the most part, understanding how easy it is to manipulate those passions from without. It took the evil genius of this age to perfect a system of financial and political exploitation based on the insight that St. Paul and St. Augustine had into what they termed the "slavery of sin." This book describes the systematic construction of a worldview based on that insight. It explains how sexual liberation became a form of political control.

E. Michael Jones
South Bend, Indiana
February 20, 1999

E. MICHAEL JONES

----------------------------------

Notes

1. John Heidenry, What Wild Ecstasy: The Rise and Fall of the Sexual Revolution (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1997), p.12.

2. Ibid., p.405.

3. Saint Augustine, City of God (New York: Doubleday, 1958), p.40.

4. Marquis de Sade, Justine, Philosophy of the Bedroom, & Other Writings compiled and translated by Richard Seaver and Austryn Wainhouse (New York: Grove Press, 1965), p.315.

5. Ibid.

...

Women's sexuality has a plasticity that is rather remarkable, which is why it has been feared by males for such a great and varied part of history.

No, women are just fools who will do anything to get attention and praise. You guys are such suckers.

It's called manipulation.

Siobhan,

I have the excellent book Libido Dominandi and I recommend it to one and all who are interested in the topic of how sexual perversion is used by Jews and kikealikes to disorder society and make it more amendable to Jewish ends.

I was thrilled that Alex reprinted the introduction. You can see how the lying Jews of the ADL try and drive a wedge between us and Roman Catholics, as in the recent lies about Alex they spread around Kirksville. The Jews are cockaroaches that fear the light of the truth being shined on their corruption.

I think we will be seeing more from Mike Jones, which truth-telling Hymie Kikenstein will severely dislike.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1587314657/104-9913493-7280749?v=glance&n=283155&%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance

Libido Dominandi is now available in trade paperback for $28 each, at that link. I bought my hardcover for $50. But sales were so strong that they were able to get it reprinted in paperback.

Here some Jew whines about E Michael Jones telling the truth at a speech in the Czech Republic:

Among the anti-Semitic literature cited in the report was an article seeking to connect Bolshevism and Judaism, a frequent accusation by the extreme right wing in Europe. The article appeared in Catholic Review, a fringe Internet magazine that Catholic authorities in Prague say has nothing to do with the church or with mainstream Catholicism.

Catholic Review also organized a lecture on Judaism by an American, E. Michael Jones, a purported historian who equated Jews to sons of Satan in his speech.

In other publications, anti-Israel commentaries are a staple of the Communist magazine Halo Noviny. Since nearly one fourth of the lower house of Parliament is Communist, the newspaper’s readership is relatively large

http://discardedlies.com/entries/2005/05/antisemitism_in_the_czech_republic.php

Libido Dominadi is writ by a jewess who whines about the holocaust on her site. I agree however that it is a fascinating piece of work.

That's true to some extent.

But we will NEVER accept the normalization of homosexual practice. That kills the tribe. We WILL stigmatize homosexuality and keep it that way. Do you want to know why?

If we dont it harms our TRIBE. Now known as our RACE.

My first post on this thread #6 (http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php?p=280832&postcount=6)
expresses similar sentiment to yours. What I think is not helpful is the intrusiveness into the bedrooms of WN who may or may not have some assignations which are not the norm. I am speaking of consensual adults.
What has prompted me to speak out in a somewhat conciliatory tone regarding, not homsexuality per se, but rather menage a trois type of sexual experimentation was the scandalous attacks on a prominent WN activist and leader as was posted some time ago here on VNNF. Also there are discreet male homosexuals who are doing what they can to counter the jew and the colored shock troops of the jew. Now do I celebrate the lifestyle of the homosexual male, far from it, I feel, as you do, that is strongly contraindicated, and I speak out, in my post linked above, strongly on the female homosexual. I agree that a "bisexual woman" is not something to be appreciated either. What I tend to cast a more benign eye upon are the situations such as you describe early in your post the silly sort of girl-girl stuff that college kids engage in. I also will not condemn a WN man and his wife because they may enact a menage a trois. Surely the Europeans have had such, albeit discreetly, for much of contemporary history.
I feel that is a different sort of activity than actual homsexual or alleged bisexual women. As was mentioned in an earlier post by someone, that David Lane's latest short story entertains just such a situation.

What I want to make clear is that I do not think homosexuality, especially amongst our women, is a healthy thing.
I also do not think that bisexuality, that is a woman can one day fall in love with a man the next with a woman, is a healthy thing.
What I do think is that sometimes the menage trois situation, handled by mature adults, is not ipso facto malignant to our people.

We need our women to bear White children and anything that thwarts that is not helpful.

Libido Dominadi is writ by a jewess who whines about the holocaust on her site. I agree however that it is a fascinating piece of work.

What part of the name "E. Michael Jones" indicates to you that he is a Jewess? He's a he, first off, second off, he's Roman Catholic, third off, he's written about ten articles in the past year criticizing Jews and Jewish social subversion. Exactly where did you get that mistaken impression?

......... Also there are discreet male homosexuals who are doing what they can to counter the jew and the colored shock troops of the jew. ........................
We need our women to bear White children and anything that thwarts that is not helpful.

I like the way you try to pull people together New Order. You sound like a decent person.

About the male homosexuals who support WN. Yes they exist. Yes we are thankful for their support. Yes they will benefit from a Whiter world just like anybody else.

But that's where tolerance for them ends. Homosexuality in the west has always been tolerated to some extent, IN THE CLOSET. If it comes OUT of the closet, it gets denounced. If it becomes a threat to public health or moral issues, it has to get snipped. If it transgresses from mild perversion into severe such as zoophilia and pedophilia, it gets severely corrected. Let's not have any misunderstandings about this at all. Homosexuality is abnormal and it's a vice. It's a vice of particular concern to us because it depresses the birthrate. Other than that, we need not devote any special attention to it, as it's merely one among many of the tools and vices the Enemy uses against us, and to over-fixiate on one thing is to fail to devote needed attention to another.

But that's where tolerance for them ends. Homosexuality in the west has always been tolerated to some extent, IN THE CLOSET. If it comes OUT of the closet, it gets denounced. If it becomes a threat to public health or moral issues, it has to get snipped. If it transgresses from mild perversion into severe such as zoophilia and pedophilia, it gets severely corrected. Let's not have any misunderstandings about this at all. Homosexuality is abnormal and it's a vice. It's a vice of particular concern to us because it depresses the birthrate. Other than that, we need not devote any special attention to it, as it's merely one among many of the tools and vices the Enemy uses against us, and to over-fixiate on one thing is to fail to devote needed attention to another.


I fully agree with your statement. The sort of people who are doing good for the Volk and who are of that status are, as far as I have observed, people who keep their status private. I think that is all we can ask, and is all that we, as a people, have asked of them, keep it discreet, private, between consenting adults and there will be no problems from mainstream society.

Sumner Redstone, Murray Rothstein, who owns MTV and its parent companies, pushed the homosexual angle to young and impressionable White kids. That is an evil that is precisely what you are discussing.

Do we want our daughters to engage in this stuff--of course not, I do the best I can to instill within her a NS view of life: honor, loyalty, naturalness, integrity and fidelity to the Volk and that includes the survival of our race through having White children.

As you have mentioned in a previous post the jew tries to force an artificial wedge between us and the Catholic Church. Is our worldview that drastically different from the Gibsons, pater et fils or are they much, much closer than either side will admit? I think virtually all NS and WN of every stripe adhere to a moral code that envisions healthy and whole families.

A cursory examination of NS Germany will show a healthier attitude towards family, without deadening prudery, than most churches evince today. Yet that will not be recognized as long as ZOG controls the avenues of information for Joe and Jane America.

It's appropriate you mention the Jews, homos, and Catholic Church. The Jews have been working in tandem with the homos that have infiltrated the priesthood in the past 40 years. I know of more than one specific example. No renewal of the Roman Catholic Church will occur without a major purging of the homosexuals who constantly work to undermine Tradition, whether that means the family or the shared understanding of the Jew as damned Christkiller.

Jew, feminist, homo--- that is the troika that always work together to undermine White social institutions, whether church, family, ethnos, race or nation. Jewess and Red Rosa Luxembourg summed it up neatly: "Marriage is slavery."

How many people here have read KD Rebel where David Lane suggested that females are naturally bisexual? Check it out on White Revolution's site if you've never seen it.



The trap is set....


I was able to get about two paragraphs into that guy's twisted prose before I was thoroughly disgusted.

The herd acts the way it's told.

People that can be convinced Julia Roberts is attractive can be convinced of anything.


Yes, particularly that dumbass who left his younger, more attractive wife to marry that horsefaced broad.

Don't let your healthy lifestyle end with never hopping in bed with a second partner in your marriage.

There are a ton of other ways your health is being threatened such as:

Visiting the supermarket where hundreds of people with diseases go to feel your food with their hands dripping with bacteria and viruses.

Using doorknobs with tons of bacteria and viruses on them.

Using a public bathroom where the sinks and facets are loaded with germs and fecal matter.

Visiting a bar for a beer in a glass that is only washed for a single second in soapy water so that virus and germs are all over the lip.

Drinking bottled water with virus and germs inside.

Trusting that your husband hasn't had unprotected sex with a prostitute then finding out you have a social disease somehow.

Drinking from a religious chalice with germs all over it.

Eating fats, oils, meats, fish, cheese, milk, and other high protein / high fat foods instead of sticking with fruits, vegetables, and starches for a healthier body.

Going to the office, school, or other public place and practicing the nervous habit of picking your nose, wiping your eyes with hands that touched the desk, scratching your ear, touching your lips with your fingers, and other neurotic little gestures you do minute-by-minute and which threaten your health.

Visiting the doctor's office where germs are all over the chairs, magazines, and tables and where sick people are sneezing out particles of infection into the air filled with diseases that they came to the doctor for.

I think it suffices to say that a lesbian in your bed now and then would endanger you alot less than a trip to the store during a pandemic.

Don't think I am advocating this, but as the Devil's Advocate, I wanted to point out the foibles of your argument. Your health is under stress from ALL of the above things that you could care less about.

It's a bit hypocritical to mention a bisexual woman in your bedroom as a disease threat when you could care less about these far more dangerous and hazardous activities that you and others probably practice minute-by-minute.

Have a nice day. Heed the above list and stay healthy.

:box:


I've been to supermarkets hundreds of times. I've opened thousands of doorknobs, and even used my share of public toilets, and I've never contracted a venereal disease.

I was able to get about two paragraphs into that guy's twisted prose before I was thoroughly disgusted.I read the entire story. Despite it being quite poorly written, the actual storyline wasn't really any worse than some of the *romance* novels marketed to women. The big difference is that most women know that their novels are nothing more than fiction. I know some men who have read KD Rebel believe that it is prophetic simply because it was written by David Lane.

I know some men who have read KD Rebel believe that it is prophetic simply because it was written by David Lane.


Gee, that sounds familiar. :rolleyes:

Gee, that sounds familiar. :rolleyes:Why now, have you met men who believe that way also? :eek: ;)

Why now, have you met men who believe that way also? :eek: ;)


Just the one..and that was enough. I don't know if he took it as something that could or should be. Either way, I'll stop now before I sound like a bitch. ;)

That must have been an INTERESTING conversation. TELL EVERYTHING!!!

Just the one..and that was enough. I don't know if he took it as something that could or should be. Either way, I'll stop now before I sound like a bitch. ;)
I got the distinct feeling that he took it not only as could and should, but also as would.

I got the distinct feeling that he took it not only as could and should, but also as would.


If he can't handle one girlfriend, how in the world does he think he could handle multiple wives? Delusional, he is. :rolleyes:

If he can't handle one girlfriend, how in the world does he think he could handle multiple wives? Delusional, he is. :rolleyes:I suppose he figures they'd be too busy running around after all the little mini-hims to be able to demand too much of him time.

I suppose he figures they'd be too busy running around after all the little mini-hims to be able to demand too much of him time.

/me tries to get the mental picture of mini-hims out of her head. One of him is way too much!

/me tries to get the mental picture of mini-hims out of her head. One of him is way too much!Such is the case for a great many people in the world, yet that doesn't stop them from spreading their DNA as much as possible. :eek:

Perhaps that won't be the case with him. Perhaps women will recognize his psychopathic tendencies before procreating with him, or even marrying him for that matter. Somehow I can picture him in 20 years, in some one room cabin in the woods..him, his cats and his guns. Somehow blaming me for him not fulfilling his duty to have 6 wives and 34 kids. :rolleyes:

Somehow I can picture him in 20 years, in some one room cabin in the woods..him, his cats and his guns. Somehow blaming me for him not fulfilling his duty to have 6 wives and 34 kids. :rolleyes:The part with the cats is the part that scares me the most.

The part with the cats is the part that scares me the most.


Aha! So you can imagine that scenario as well...

He'd probaly end up hallucinating on some wild mushroom and mating with his cat thinking its a different kind of pussy.

He'd probaly end up hallucinating on some wild mushroom and mating with his cat thinking its a different kind of pussy.
I'd sure as hell hope not. :eek:

Are we going to get to the sexy details of that conversation or NOT?!

no, you won't. :)