Re: Redlands Bicycle Classic

Clay Tidwell

"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<EXecc.15779$Dv2.3889@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...

> You can get the same information in a dozen places. I note that instead of
> criticizing the facts you criticize the source. Interesting.

Paul Cameron was dropped from the American Psychological Association
rolls many years ago. Every time he opens his mouth he gets nuked by
reputable scientists, statisticians and his (ex)-peers...if any source
was worth criticizing, this would be the one.

gwhite

"Robert Chung" <me2@privacy.net> wrote:

> I think you need to read a bit less and understand a bit more.

Even though you're way off, at least you made a point without dancing
around. I'd say that is progress.

You didn't understand what the "question" was.

Howard Kveck

In article <51eef7a1.0404061321.5ad4a507@posting.google.com>,
claytid@yahoo.com (Clay Tidwell) wrote:

> "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:<EXecc.15779$Dv2.3889@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
>
> > You can get the same information in a dozen places. I note that instead of
> > criticizing the facts you criticize the source. Interesting.
>
> Paul Cameron was dropped from the American Psychological Association
> rolls many years ago. Every time he opens his mouth he gets nuked by
> reputable scientists, statisticians and his (ex)-peers...if any source
> was worth criticizing, this would be the one.

You can indeed get Cameron's information in a dozen sources: his
"studies" are repeatedly used by anti-gay groups, despite being shown to be
methodologically worthless by (many) others. The fact that they are
discounted by the mainstream psych world matters little to those groups.

The fact that Charles Socarides is cited is also problematic, since he
is a proponent of "conversion therapy" to "repair" homosexuals into good
little heteros. That theory seems to also be getting fairly general
dismissal by mainstream psychiatry. After all, they dropped homosexuality
from the DSM thirty years ago, yet Socarides and co. persist in claiming to
be able to treat it.

The point of Boys' article seems to have been to make homosexuals appear
to be dangerous, violent people that "normal" society should fear. Lines
like: "homosexuals often are mass killers who also torture their victims",
or: "The top six U.S. male serial killers were all homosexuals" are rather
inflammatory, aren't they? Even if the latter statement were true (and it
sure does not appear that to be), to try to extrapolate that out to
describe all homosexuals is patently ridiculous and pejorative.

This kind of fear-mongering is no different than that used against
blacks in the past ("They rape white women!") or Jews now ("They drink Arab
children's blood!").

--
tanx,
Howard

Q: Why did the metalhead cross the road?
A: Because he's a gullible moron who'll buy
anything with a skull on it.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Tom Kunich

"Howard Kveck" <YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote in message
news:YOURhoward-6A9118.00071807042004@netnews.comcast.net...
> In article <51eef7a1.0404061321.5ad4a507@posting.google.com>,
> claytid@yahoo.com (Clay Tidwell) wrote:
>
> > "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:<EXecc.15779$Dv2.3889@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> >
> > > You can get the same information in a dozen places. I note that
instead of
> > > criticizing the facts you criticize the source. Interesting.
> >
> > Paul Cameron was dropped from the American Psychological Association
> > rolls many years ago. Every time he opens his mouth he gets nuked by
> > reputable scientists, statisticians and his (ex)-peers...if any source
> > was worth criticizing, this would be the one.

(Note, this is the same "professional" association who has reported that
pedophilia isn't "all bad" for children".)

> You can indeed get Cameron's information in a dozen sources: his
> "studies" are repeatedly used by anti-gay groups, despite being shown to
be
> methodologically worthless by (many) others. The fact that they are
> discounted by the mainstream psych world matters little to those groups.

Then you surely have a citation?

> The fact that Charles Socarides is cited is also problematic, since he
> is a proponent of "conversion therapy" to "repair" homosexuals into good
> little heteros. That theory seems to also be getting fairly general
> dismissal by mainstream psychiatry. After all, they dropped homosexuality
> from the DSM thirty years ago, yet Socarides and co. persist in claiming
to
> be able to treat it.

Whereas you're sure that somehow homosexuality is "normal" and doesn't
require treatment. I had one of the textbooks from the Harvard School of
Medicine's Psychiatric department circa 1990 and it said plainly that
homosexuality was a mental deviation that was incurable not because it was
incurable but because homosexuals didn't think that they had any "problem"
to fix.

> The point of Boys' article seems to have been to make homosexuals
appear
> to be dangerous, violent people that "normal" society should fear.

True and I disagree with the position that "all" homosexuals are dangerous
predators. But a significant, if minority, number of them are.

What do you find funny at the fact that homosexuals hang around train, plane
and bus stations and try to pick up young men and boys? Do you think this
indicates a normal sexual balance?

You don't seem to believe that extreme violence among homosexuals is common.
And yet we saw that when Jeffrey Dahmer was chasing a nude boy through the
streets with a kitchen knife and was stopped by a patrol cop HE AND THE BOY
WERE RELEASED. Do you suppose that's because it was something unusual and
the cop just responded badly? Or, since Dahmer later killed and ate the boy,
it is something that cops see with homosexuals on a regular basis and have
been desensitized by demands that they be left alone?

> This kind of fear-mongering is no different than that used against
> blacks in the past ("They rape white women!") or Jews now ("They drink
Arab
> children's blood!").

Right. However, there is that little problem of evidence and court reports.

Howard Kveck

In article <GJ0dc.902$A_4.235@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "Howard Kveck" <YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote in message
> news:YOURhoward-6A9118.00071807042004@netnews.comcast.net...

> (Note, this is the same "professional" association who has reported that
> pedophilia isn't "all bad" for children".)

A slight distortion there. If you want, go here and scroll down to the
section headed "Terminlogy":
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainb...olestation.html

> > You can indeed get Cameron's information in a dozen sources: his
> > "studies" are repeatedly used by anti-gay groups, despite being shown to
> > be methodologically worthless by (many) others. The fact that they are
> > discounted by the mainstream psych world matters little to those groups.
>
> Then you surely have a citation?

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainb...ron_survey.html

> Whereas you're sure that somehow homosexuality is "normal" and doesn't
> require treatment. I had one of the textbooks from the Harvard School of
> Medicine's Psychiatric department circa 1990 and it said plainly that
> homosexuality was a mental deviation that was incurable not because it was
> incurable but because homosexuals didn't think that they had any "problem"
> to fix.

"Normal"? It's how they are wired, Tom. Do you really think that people
consciously make a decision to be in a minority that is treated the way
homosexuals are? Studies of people who've gone through the "reparative
therapies" the NARTH pushes show that only the behavior of the "successes"
is changed - the fantasies, desires and longings are still the same. They
are subject to deep depression because of an inability to reconcile the
desired behavior and thought processes with what is still going on in their
heads. Check it out:

"Resolution on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation

Adopted by the American Psychological Association Council of
Representatives"
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainb...ion97_text.html

(As a by the way, a search on "Paul Cameron" & "APA" gets a raft of hits
with a variety of viewpoints. Some are better written and laid out than
others, as is always the case...)

> What do you find funny at the fact that homosexuals hang around train, plane
> and bus stations and try to pick up young men and boys? Do you think this
> indicates a normal sexual balance?

Are they, in fact, all (or even 'many') trying to "pick up young men and
boys"? Perhaps they're doing the same as the straight guys or low-level
drug dealers are when they hang out in the same locales - trolling for
whatever it is that strikes their fancy. You imply something nefarious. A
gay man trolling for another gay man is bad in what way?

> You don't seem to believe that extreme violence among homosexuals is common.

True - I don't believe it is "common". It does happen, but it happens
pretty damn regularly among straights, too.

> And yet we saw that when Jeffrey Dahmer was chasing a nude boy through the
> streets with a kitchen knife and was stopped by a patrol cop HE AND THE BOY
> WERE RELEASED. Do you suppose that's because it was something unusual and
> the cop just responded badly? Or, since Dahmer later killed and ate the boy,
> it is something that cops see with homosexuals on a regular basis and have
> been desensitized by demands that they be left alone?

What happened with Dahmer and Konerak Sinthasomphone was that Dahmer
went out to buy some beer after drilling a hole in Sinthasomphone's head
(Dahmer regularly experimented with making zombies). Sinthasomphone came to
and got out, where he ran into the three cops but was incoherent (due to
the meds and his own language problems). Dahmer didn't have a knife with
him, but when he happened upon them, he told the cops that they were lovers
and had had an argument and that his "friend" was drunk. The cops decided
it was a gay lover's tiff (in spite of the bleeding) and they didn't want
to get involved. So they gave Sinthasomphone back to Dahmer and told them
to work it out. Since there is no evidence they saw things like that at
all, let alone on a regular basis, I'd say it was a bad response on the
cops' part.

But why bring up Dahmer? His thing wasn't homosexuality - he derived
sexual pleasure from the acts of murder and butchering the victims bodies.
He chose to pick up prospective victims at gay bars because he thought they
were more willing to come with him (he often offered them money to be
photographed) and could be plied with drinks (which he drugged). His
problem wasn't homosexuality, it was that he was a lifelong psychopath.

> > This kind of fear-mongering is no different than that used against
> > blacks in the past ("They rape white women!") or Jews now ("They drink
> > Arab children's blood!").
>
> Right. However, there is that little problem of evidence and court reports.

Well, your opinion about what constitutes evidence is apparently heavily
influenced by your bias against homosexuality. As for court reports, I
think you'll find that you're far more likely to have some kind of violent
encounter with a straight guy than a gay (unless you seek one out to prove
some point).

--
tanx,
Howard

Q: Why did the metalhead cross the road?
A: Because he's a gullible moron who'll buy
anything with a skull on it.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Tom Paterson

>From: Howard Kveck

(Tom Kunich wrote):

>> Whereas you're sure that somehow >>homosexuality is "normal" (snip)

For once and all, the answer is "yes".

>>and doesn't require treatment.

No, "treatment" is not directly needed or desirable. It's really a mind your
own business thing. Don (likes) Boys is a whacko, hate-mongering asshole.

You were saying, Howard? Oh, yeah, Dahmer... the difference between homosexual
and psychopath. Maybe another try? Dictionary reference, perhaps?
--Tom Paterson

Howard Kveck

In article <20040408104336.25578.00000008@mb-m04.aol.com>,
dustoyevsky@aol.comnospam (Tom Paterson) wrote:

> >From: Howard Kveck
>
> (Tom Kunich wrote):
>
> >> Whereas you're sure that somehow >>homosexuality is "normal" (snip)
>
> For once and all, the answer is "yes".
>
> >>and doesn't require treatment.
>
> No, "treatment" is not directly needed or desirable. It's really a mind your
> own business thing. Don (likes) Boys is a whacko, hate-mongering asshole.
>
> You were saying, Howard? Oh, yeah, Dahmer... the difference between homosexual
> and psychopath. Maybe another try? Dictionary reference, perhaps?
> --Tom Paterson

As an afterthought, the most accurate description of Jeff-Boy-Ardee
would be "necrophiliac". Lovely.

--
tanx,
Howard

Q: Why did the metalhead cross the road?
A: Because he's a gullible moron who'll buy
anything with a skull on it.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?