The Health Risks of Gay Sex

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Apologies, Mark Fowler wasn't gay. It's interesting that you should think gay people are never portrayed in a negative light on tv, yet here's a review on a gay website which claims exactly the opposite.

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/07/22/bbc-condemned-for-tv-portrayal-of-gay-people/

Gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell added: “Congratulat ...[text shortened]... are portrayed. We deserve more and fairer air-time, including more positive coverage.

another rant that is specific to the BBC, perhaps he should watch, the big bang theory, or glee, or the new normal, or the Simpsons, seems like tv programme producers are falling over themselves to be more inclusive.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
The Following. Two of the serial killers are gay, and they even kiss on screen. Isn't anyone thinking of the children?

Why do I wonder if more people in the US complained about the kiss than the depiction of murder, torture, alcoholism, brainwashing etc etc?

did they need to be gay, considering that it is alleged that gays make up only like ten percent of the population, serial killers even less, was it necessary to portray them as gay, why couldn't they simply have been run of the mill serial killers? the statistical chances of having two gay serial killers must be quite small I imagine.


Why, because it offends their sensibilities, that's why.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
The Following. Two of the serial killers are gay, and they even kiss on screen. Isn't anyone thinking of the children?

Why do I wonder if more people in the US complained about the kiss than the depiction of murder, torture, alcoholism, brainwashing etc etc?

In Extras, one of the characters who is married and has a daughter is obviously gay.

When in the closet, he forces his daughter perform a variety of demeaning, and sometimes sexual, theatrical acts with him.

Once out of the closet, he abandons his family and then spends his entire time cruising various venues looking to pick up any spare man going free.

Need I go on?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
did they need to be gay, considering that it is alleged that gays make up only like ten percent of the population, serial killers even less, was it necessary to portray them as gay, why couldn't they simply have been run of the mill serial killers? the statistical chances of having two gay serial killers must be quite small I imagine.


Why, because it offends their sensibilities, that's why.

First, you ask for a single example of TV portraying gay people in a bad light. Now I have given you one (well 2 and one film now), you are arguing that they have to put them in to meet some form of PC agenda!

Err, and 10% might be about the right percentage, given the number of serial killers in the series.

But, credit where its due, I did laugh out loud at 'run of the mill serial killers'.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
another rant that is specific to the BBC, perhaps he should watch, the big bang theory, or glee, or the new normal, or the Simpsons, seems like tv programme producers are falling over themselves to be more inclusive.

I've always found your infatuation with gay men and what they do with their willies rather strange Rob. I don't know anybody who posts on this website go on about this topic more than you.

While your quest is admirable in it's tenacity, it seems to me to be a little off key to me. No doubt the stats for HIV infection are concerning and there is a problem which does of course need to be addressed. But the numbers involved pale into insignificance when compared to those who will die in this country from obesity and it's associated diseases. Obesity is sweeping this nation, the 'developed world' and the 'developing world' like a pandemic of Biblical proportions, and all you keep going on about is what gay men do with their willies.

Maybe dialing your focus into some other Biblical sins and their consequences maybe in order?

Originally posted by Rank outsider
First, you ask for a single example of TV portraying gay people in a bad light. Now I have given you one (well 2 and one film now), you are arguing that they have to put them in to meet some form of PC agenda!

Err, and 10% might be about the right percentage, given the number of serial killers in the series.

But, credit where its due, I did laugh out loud at 'run of the mill serial killers'.

well if it raised even a smile it is enough!

Originally posted by Proper Knob
I've always found your infatuation with gay men and what they do with their willies rather strange Rob. I don't know anybody who posts on this website go on about this topic more than you.

While your quest is admirable in it's tenacity, it seems to me to be a little off key to me. No doubt the stats for HIV infection are concerning and there is a pro dialing your focus into some other Biblical sins and their consequences maybe in order?

sigh, its not about me, just saying, i did not write the report, the health risks of gay sex. I have already answered why i am interested in the subject, in that it corroborates my religious beliefs in that homosexuality is unnatural and contains inherent health risks, you need not acquiesce. Obesity is rarely, if ever portrayed as healthy, can we say the same thing about the gay lifestyle, i dont think so.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
sigh, its not about me, just saying, i did not write the report, the health risks of gay sex. I have already answered why i am interested in the subject, in that it corroborates my religious beliefs in that homosexuality is unnatural and contains inherent health risks, you need not acquiesce. Obesity is rarely, if ever portrayed as healthy, can we say the same thing about the gay lifestyle, i dont think so.

being scottish is portrayed as being normal on tv. scots are hardly ever shown in a negative light. why are people doing this knowing full well the health risks of being scottish??

Originally posted by stellspalfie
being scottish is portrayed as being normal on tv. scots are hardly ever shown in a negative light. why are people doing this knowing full well the health risks of being scottish??

because lets face it, would you rather have a cool Scottish accent, or a Dudley accent, that's why and on the contrary Scots are portrayed as being tight fisted, Calvinistic and dour, which could not be further from the truth.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
because lets face it, would you rather have a cool Scottish accent, or a Dudley accent, that's why and on the contrary Scots are portrayed as being tight fisted, Calvinistic and dour, which could not be further from the truth.

you may make light of this. i for one am worried about young people being drawn to the scottish lifestyle. the dashing good looks and rock and roll lifestyle of people like the proclaimers hardly paint a real picture of the real issues facing scottish life.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
you may make light of this. i for one am worried about young people being drawn to the scottish lifestyle. the dashing good looks and rock and roll lifestyle of people like the proclaimers hardly paint a real picture of the real issues facing scottish life.

I know even Ewan McGregor has made gaydo movies, the shame of it! What type of role model is that?

Originally posted by JS357
I am glad we have moved to this subtopic and that you are willing to discuss it.

Having people accept a belief is one thing; what you want them to do because of that belief, is quite another. Also, they may do things based on those beliefs, if they accept them, that you never had in mind and might be dismayed to hear came due to your persuasiveness.

Le ? A court? This forum? In creation of laws? In interpretation of the constitution of a state?

Goodness It's been 8 pages today, and over 40 posts by you, since you said it was late and you would try to reply to this. I looked and can't find a reply to this post. I am happy to be wrong about this but right now I am disappointed in you. As RJ said, I have an opportunity to learn something worthwhile. I don't want to learn something negative about you. If you have answered it in a reply to someone else, please tell me the page number.

Edit. Here is my post in its entirety.

I am glad we have moved to this subtopic and that you are willing to discuss it.

Having people accept a belief is one thing; what you want them to do because of that belief, is quite another. Also, they may do things based on those beliefs, if they accept them, that you never had in mind and might be dismayed to hear came due to your persuasiveness.

Let's assume you are right about everything you have said in this thread.

What do you want people to do on the basis of the beliefs you want them to accept? I think you should specify limits (if any) that you want hold yourself to, and that you want them to respect. For example, do you think these acts should be felonies when practiced by consenting adults? Do you think they should be felonies only between same sex people, but allowed between married couples? Or should they just be institutionalized and treated as insane? Or should we not legislate against them, but just allow non-profits to promote and provide treatment to self-identifying individuals? Or what?

This might be less obvious to you if you have a non-participative approach to governance, but people here in the US and other rule-of-law nations, tend to want their laws implement, or at least be consistent with, their beliefs.

You ask "How can this be defended?"

What is the arena in which this would need defense? A court? This forum? In creation of laws? In interpretation of the constitution of a state?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
my solution? stop promoting the idea that homosexual sex is healthy ...

Almost everytime you are asked a question you come out with "I'm not here to give my opinion, only facts"

Is stop promoting the idea .... a fact?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I know even Ewan McGregor has made gaydo movies, the shame of it! What type of role model is that?

What is 'gaydo'? Are you just trying to see how near to being offensive you can get?

Originally posted by JS357
Goodness It's been 8 pages today, and over 40 posts by you, since you said it was late and you would try to reply to this. I looked and can't find a reply to this post. I am happy to be wrong about this but right now I am disappointed in you. As RJ said, I have an opportunity to learn something worthwhile. I don't want to learn something negative about you. If court? This forum? In creation of laws? In interpretation of the constitution of a state?

yes you are correct, but one gets caught up in the melee, i humble myself and bow low towards the earth, here was your question,

What do you want people to do on the basis of the beliefs you want them to accept?

Interesting in itself, because it it highlights he difference between religion and philosophy, the latter merely being content to look at problems without proscribing any kind of action, the former providing a course of action. I think i intimated what i want people to do, that being, to make a reappraisal of the effects of homosexual sex, for it appears to me that there is a disparity between the portrayal of homosexual lifestyle and the effects of such a life style.

You know my reticence about mixing politics and religion and it seems strange to the European ear to expect government to institute legislation which complies with our religious beliefs and for this reason, i am often mistaken by our American friends for being right wing because of my stance on homosexuality and other issues including abortion, where in fact i am a socialist by nature. My city Glasgow has a fine socialist tradition of which i identify with to an extent. In this matter i always insist that legislation is a matter for the government and that as long as it does not infringe upon the exercise of the faculty of conscience and Biblical principles, i am happy.

As for this idea of what realm could this practice be defended, i make a simple appeal to reason within the framework of the forum, or more importantly, within the psyche of those who frequent it.