1
17

[–] chaos63 1 points 17 points (+18|-1) ago 

I'm conflicted about this kind of stuff. I find the assumption that men cannot be trusted around children and will rape anything that moves to be SJW madness, here is where the bastards screw us though. If we can't trust gay men with boys then surely we can't trust straight men with little girls can we? Next step assume all men are rapists and children are safer with their mothers even though the stats show women carry more child abuse by far than men. At the same time, I find the idea of children being raised in a gay environment however well could be a big part of shaping their preception of how they should behave sexually and who they are really attracted to. but this doesn't just apply to gays coz we also have stories of straight parents who decide to treat their kids as gay/trans/whatever to the exent kids feel they are disappointing them by coming out as straight.

0
7

[–] BigDaddy69 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

If we can't trust gay men with boys then surely we can't trust straight men with little girls can we?

Many pedophiles abuse children regardless of the child's gender, so you can't trust "striaght" men with little boys either. It's a paraphilla, not a sexuality.

1
3

[–] chaos63 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

I'm with you, about the tiny number of men who abuse kids and should be killed very slowly and very painfully. My problem is that shit then gets used to cast all men in a bad light. Once you're in divorce court, a woman hints at anything inappropriate and you lose your kids because all men are rapists. A lot of men only took the red pill after losing their children and realising how biased the system is against them. How do we stop stuff like this leading to the dangerous idea that you can't trust any men that has ruined so many men's lives and makes an accusation as good as a conviction in the court of public opinion.

1
5

[–] firex726 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

I's just a self fulfilling prophecy.

Since legitimate men have been scared away from interacting with kids, the only ones left are the ones with nefarious intents. Which further fuels the stigma of men and kids; and thus weeds out more and more good men.

0
8

[–] chaos63 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

There was an experiment in England where they had child actors pretend to be lost and crying in a shopping mall and out of hundred of men, none helped them. They went to look for mall cops and told them there were lost looking kids but they never approached or talked to the children. When asked, they all said they were afraid of being taken as pedophiles. What is sad is way more children are lost than kidnapped and almost none are kidnapped by strangers but thanks to stranger danger, it is safer to let the kids stay lost than find yourself in jail for trying to help.

I even saw an australian article where the cops were looking for a man who stopped a crying child and asked what was wrong. She ran home and the police put out a search for him. The suspect was still at large. suspected of asking of a crying child is okay? This shit is ridiculous, there are parks you aren't allowed to go without a child in tow, schools that don't let parents come to sports days etc. And all the while the actual pedos get free reign, this went down whilst a muslim gang was grooming and prostituting underage girls and powerful media and politics people were abusing kids unquestioned.

0
1

[–] prairie 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I thought that the main issue was whether two males could parent a child without depriving them of something essential.

0
1

[–] Eleutheria 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

That's my train of thought. It'd probably be worse with two lesbians, in all honesty.

0
0

[–] Eleutheria 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I'd suggest reading over that "LGBT Red Pill" post if you haven't already. But for starters, homosexual people just tend to have more mental disorders, less exclusive relationships, and higher rates of child abuse. So by those facts alone, it's a more dangerous environment for the child.

I also think that the child needs a MOTHER and father, even if they are not the child's by birth. Each one plays crucial, separate rules in the proper raising of a child.

I will admit; two years ago, I would have been indifferent to a gay couple of EITHER gender (I still believed there were two back then, as I do today) could at least do a passable job raising a child. But the statistics regarding both homosexuality, and motherless/fatherless households, tell a different story.

1
15

[–] Alois_sticklgruber 1 points 15 points (+16|-1) ago 

Had an argument a few months back with my cousin about this issue (not this case, but in general). She is of the idea that it doesnt matter if your gay youshoukd be able to adopt. And i said, "no because the children are more likely to be raped by fags than by straight parents". And now im a horrible nazi....

I will send her this pic, and chukkle

0
7

[–] goat2017 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

And now I'm a horrible nazi.

Welcome to the club, here's your armband.

0
0

[–] Alois_sticklgruber 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Kek..... Shes a whore who is an unhappy, and pushes progressive agenda likes its religion (which to most sjw it is)

1
5

[–] RamblinRambo [S] 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

And now im a horrible nazi....

Implying that being a National Socialist is a bad thing.

4
4

[–] pork_slayer 4 points 4 points (+8|-4) ago 

Socialism

Yes, it is a bad thing.

0
0

[–] Alois_sticklgruber 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I dont believe in socialism, but the nazi party did good to get the country out of debt, but we cant forget hitler was basically running them into another depression.

0
3

[–] Rainy-Day-Dream 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

you just gotta temper your arguments a bit more; send her this it's cited

0
2

[–] projection 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

There was a post on here recently that showed the statistics and they support what you said. The breakdown of the nuclear family is cancer and nothing more.

0
6

[–] Derpfroot 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

4
6

[–] Obergruppenkraken 4 points 6 points (+10|-4) ago 

All gay rights is, is a front for Pedophilia.

3
6

[–] hedidnothingwrong 3 points 6 points (+9|-3) ago 

for degeneracy*

17
-15

0
4

[–] Rainy-Day-Dream 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

single fathers actually do statistically better than their kids than gay parents, especially lesbians

0
2

[–] Biscuitbaiter 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I don't see any dads in that picture, only two fags and a child.

0
1

[–] voatusernamevoat 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

12
1

[–] Voatcunt 12 points 1 points (+13|-12) ago  (edited ago)

There are tons of victims connected with past Pizzagate scandals that claim their heterosexual parents pimped them out. We don't blame all straight people.

Also, gays and pedos have different brain structures. This is supported by neurological studies. Gay men are designed to be good adopters. Also the last couple weeks a meme has been going around that is literally misquoting a study on children of gays and abuse. The study does say that children of gay couples are.more likely to be abused and depressed. It also says very specifically that the abuse was from the family of origin. In other words they are intentionally blaming gays for cleaning up the mess straight people made.

I'm sick of Bolshevik gays like everyone else here and pride parades make me sick.

There is an evolutionary purpose to gay people though and having a small portion of the population as built in adoption makes us more efficient.

20% of geese partners are male homosexual pairs. They take eggs from their siblings and raise them leaving their siblings free to reproduce more. Their nieces and nephews still have a high percentage of their dna so the genetics that allow for gay geese are promoted within the population at a fixed rate.

Gay humans similarly evolved to increase the productive capacity of a clan unit (albeit it at a much smaller percentage of the population, something like 2%). Bolsheviks have destroyed that purpose with pride parades and rampant sexuality and disease.

1
9

[–] remedy4reality 1 points 9 points (+10|-1) ago 

PEDOPHILES ARE USING GAY MARRIAGE AND LIBERAL ADOPTION LAWS TO ACQUIRE VICTIMS

1
1

[–] hedidnothingwrong 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

Hmm wouldn't it be easier to do the same with straight couples?

0
7

[–] solar_flare 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

Also, gays and pedos have different brain structures. This is supported by neurological studies.

You state this as if it's some kind of absolute. I think studies have shown murderers to often have different brain structures, but not everybody with that brain structure turned out to be a murderer or even suffered from temptations to murder. A lot of those studies about lgbtq+ come from biased people pushing an agenda anyways.

Gay men are designed to be good adopters.

Engaging in homosexuality or homesexual relationships is not designed at all, in fact it's against the design for humans. Great way to pass along some deadly disease as well. Not having a mother is huge loss for a child. Men and women are like magnets. The nuclear family will always be better than unnatural couples.

There is an evolutionary purpose to gay people though and having a small portion of the population as built in adoption makes us more efficient.

Pure fantasy, and gays don't pass along any type of gay gene.

20% of geese partners are male homosexual pairs. They take eggs from their siblings and raise them leaving their siblings free to reproduce more. Their nieces and nephews still have a high percentage of their dna so the genetics that allow for gay geese are promoted within the population at a fixed rate.

You can find certain animals do all kinds of weird stuff compared to humans, doesn't mean humans should do it. I'd love to see the study and read about the "gay geese," what's it out of Berkeley?

Gay humans similarly evolved to increase the productive capacity of a clan unit (albeit it at a much smaller percentage of the population, something like 2%).

Nope, they're just a product of liberalism, rebellion, low testosterone/hormonal issues, mental disorders, lack of a loving father in the home, abuse, perversion, special victim status etc.

0
0

[–] prairie 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Brain structure is kind of comical to focus on. Of course different kinds of people have different structures. The brain is the person, for the most part.

1
0

[–] EIMR 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

Nope, they're just a product of liberalism, rebellion, low testosterone/hormonal issues, mental disorders, lack of a loving father in the home, abuse, perversion, special victim status etc.

Homosexuality existed in Ancient Greece. I doubt that liberalism caused it.

1
-1

[–] Voatcunt 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago  (edited ago)

You state this as if it's some kind of absolute.

There are no "absolutes" in science, however, nobody doubts the function of the heart, lungs, or kidneys.

The region of your brain that is of interest is actually a very primitive region of your brain that has been preserved in all mammals. It has also been studied in a huge number of mammals. IT is called, generally, the Sexually Dimorphic Nucleus. In humans, it is identified as the 3rd region of Interstitial Nucleus of the Anterior Hypothalmus. This part of the brain does not demonstrate the same type of plasticity that is seen in other regions, and it is dimorphic between the genders, meaning that it is consistently different in men and women. On average, one size has been associated with women, and the other with men. With the exception of gay men having the same size as straight females. In most mammals this region of the brain develops just a few hours or days before birth. Its developmental window is sometimes only hours, and usually under several days (varies depending on the species, its only hours in rats, its several days in humans). If the baby is exposed to estrogen, estrogen blockers, testosterone, or testosterone blockers, during this phase of the pregnancy, then the sexual orientation of the offspring will be permanently changed.

These aren't the only traits that are different. You can see a list of male/female differences (all caused by hormonal balance in utero) that include everything from blink reflexes, finger length, and visual responses and have been found to also be different in men, women, gay men. They are all created by hormonal differences in development.

In the lab this has been used to manufacture permanently gay animals. For instance, rats that are exposed to either estrogen or testosterone blockers in this phase, will present themselves to other male rats for mounting (lorodosis). I toured a lab in Oregon that was doing this and creating gay sheep.

The usual response to this on voat is, "but muh y chromosome". Yes. You have a y chromosome. The thing there is only one gene on the y chromosome that makes you male, and its only transcribed ONCE in your entire existence, very early in development and only by a small number of cells. It actually only codes for the vestigial structures that become your balls and the chords connected to them. The rest of your body simply relies on the hormones secreted by these cells to determine masculinity. Each cell in your body is making decisions based on the hormonal balance between the two. Millions of years ago, before we had diverged from Monotrenes, there was really no male/female chromosomes, but the male and female genetics started clustering together in ways that prevented them from being swapped between XX chromosomes... eventually sex selection drove differences between the two genders, and slowly the chromosomes diverged as separate XY instead of a jumbled XX. Most cells in your body never even transcribe the material on the y chromosome. THe rest of the genes are required mostly for spermatogenesis and the vast majority of cells in your body have only one way of telling if you are male or female.

A lot of those studies about lgbtq+ come from biased people pushing an agenda anyways.

They seem to be straight to me. The first time I was exposed to these concepts was by a female neurologist that was being yelled at in a university lecture by a room full of feminists (most of whom were my friends at the time). Interestingly I saw her several weeks later getting yelled at by fundamentalist Christians. Also there is no consensus on trans issues. The research is very very very muddy on that. It is a fractional, tiny component of the community and so its harder to study.

You can find certain animals do all kinds of weird stuff compared to humans, doesn't mean humans should do it. I'd love to see the study and read about the "gay geese," what's it out of Berkeley?

Then google it. It isn't one study, its been studied by Zoologists ad nauseum for years. Countless articles have been written about it. You don't need me to find the sky or the sun. When you see the same set of behaviors repeatedly preserved in multiple species, along the same frequencies predicted by evolutionary mathematics, it starts to be a very suspicious set of coincidences.

low testosterone/hormonal issues,

Only during a very specific few days during pregnancy. Studies have repeatedly shown gay men to have normal hormone levels (maybe slightly higher testosterone levels, but straight men lose some testosterone when they marry and settle down, so that could explain the difference).

Nope, they're just a product of liberalism, rebellion, low testosterone/hormonal issues, mental disorders, lack of a loving father in the home, abuse, perversion, special victim status etc.

No, they are what are called maternal effects genes. There are genes that allow themother to manipulate the development of their offspring to help shape the overall makeup of the clan. For instance, if a mother has multiple male children in a row, the chance of producing a gay child increases. Her body builds up an immunity to her child's testosterone and her immune system will destroy it, making the child more effiminate. THe reason for this is simple: you don't need that much sperm to ensure the next generation, and at some point you have to start producing caretakers for the offspring the first batch of males produced. Other effects are seen as well.

For instance, some women have genes that make them more estrous, more likely to lactate, more likely to breed, more likely to experience pleasure from sex, and more likely to have huge boobs. These women also have more gay offspring.

Gay men have been shown in multiple studies to have greater empathy towards children, especially nieces and nephews than straight counterparts. They are also more likely to be financially altruistic (gay men spend more money on their nieces and nephews than their siblings do, even if they have their own offspring). They are more likely than straight men to respond to the cries of an infant.

Women secrete hormones in pregnancy that alerts and sensitizes the brains of othe rfemales to the presence of babies. IT makes them protective of babies. Straight men do not respond to these hormones, but gay men do.

We could go on and on all day. The studies actually show in some cases two parent gay men are just as good if not better than heterosexual parents. You say gay people are a mistake. I see a constellation of behaviors, genetics, and evolutionary traits. Personally, I believe in God, so I see a purpose behind it all. A purpose that Bolsheviks want to destroy.

Great way to pass along some deadly disease as well. Not having a mother is huge loss for a child. Men and women are like magnets. The nuclear family will always be better than unnatural couples.

Monogamy doesn't produce disease. Cultural Marxism does.


If you want to see a well put together intro into the actual science, I would suggest the following. There was a six part documentary done in the Netherlands, called "brainwash" that discussed the effect that "social" sciences have had on these and other debates. The documentary crew for instance deflates myths like "there is no such thing as race" or "there are no differences between males and females"... Its a very funny documentary, especially considering it caused the shut down of several very liberal schools of sociology.

The third part was done on Gay issues, and involves a lot of interesting debates between neurologists, and the social scientists that refuse to believe Gender and Sexual orientation are biologically determined.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xp0xfd_brainwashing-in-norway-part-3-gay-straight_news

0
5

[–] REEEEEapWhatYouSow 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

I think the key to your argument is the genetic connection with the child. That seems more acceptable than simply saying that gays can adopt (which i'm against). The child could theoretically know both its parents in that scenario, and people tend to be more protective to a blood relative than a stranger. Having said that, stories like this make me think that ignoring the lessons of our ancestors is not the best route, even if the lesson comes from a religious form.

2
1

[–] Voatcunt 2 points 1 points (+3|-2) ago  (edited ago)

How nice and good that children in your family or community would always be adopted by family. The truth is, kids are dying in foster care from.neglect and abuse. I have two gay members of my family that adopted kids. Their families didn't want them and didn't care. Did the kids have some problems with depression and emotional issues? Sure. They watched their parents get murdered by cartels and were basically disowned by aunts and uncles. But their dads got them tons of therapy, moved them to LITERALLY paradise, and spent tons of time with them, giving them music lessons, expensive education, etc

They seem happy now, and they're starting to look at colleges. They know several languages, play sports (one is apparently really good at football).

3
1

[–] BigDaddy69 3 points 1 points (+4|-3) ago  (edited ago)

our ancestors is not the best route, even if the lesson comes from a religious form.

Our ancestors considered a woman ripe for fucking as soon as her cunt started bleeding, and they used to shit in their drinking water. They didn't always make the best decisions.

0
0

[–] KeksMex 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

children of gay couples

Nature abhors a contradiction.

load more comments ▼ (8 remaining)