JavaScript must be enabled to use this chat software. Jump to content

SBJB

Members
  • Content count

    953
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

SBJB last won the day on October 1 2013

SBJB had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

275 Excellent

About SBJB

  • Rank
    SW Legend

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • How You Found Us?
    Search Engine (Ie Google)
  • Location
    England
  • Interests
    Domestic abuse
  • Sexuality
    Gay

Recent Profile Visitors

7,497 profile views
  1. I can relate to that a lot. My gaydar used to be **** too, ****! So I asked myself; why couldn't I see what others could? Then the more I learnt about me, the more I learnt about others.
  2. Thanks, and that's interesting. Because a young child can't determine if someone is gay, but an adult can. So when an adult says that some gay guys are obviously gay (camp), and some aren't clear to see. Perhaps this is because a higher level of observation is needed, one that can determine if all men are gay or not? Some people have a good gaydar, and other's not. Maybe there are always signs if you know what to look for?
  3. Of course science doesn't understand sexuality. As I said above, it's trying to understand something that it thinks needs to be understood. We are born understanding it, it's only when society's warped views get in the way, combined with our unresolved emotional issues, social acceptance etc, that we end up so confused. How do we understand heterosexuality but not others? We are missing the obvious, the simple obvious. And even if we didn't understand it, how would that stop us from being able to identify if someone is gay? We don't understand what causes some illnesses, but we can still access a patient and diagnos them with it. Indeed I shared the same thoughts regarding them only testing openly gay men. But doesn't that just bring us back to my belief that there are far more homosexuals than we realise?
  4. The issue isn't really about whether or not you can determine someone's sexuality by looking at their face. It's about your fear of other's knowing your sexuality, and also your fear of you knowing their sexuality. Have you ever questioned yourself about your parent's sexuality? Does it make you feel uncomfortable? Make you feel unstable? Why is that?
  5. I think we can very easily understood sexuality. If we understand that the way we currently view sexuality is setup so that we view all sexual expression as a sin. In other words, if you forget what you know, what you've been taught, take the emotion out of it, it is pretty clear to see. We don't have the evidence? The article has just given you the evidence. What evidence do you have to dispute it? Apart from stating that you don't understand it. The face has connection with gender, you'd have to agree with that. We know that women's voices soften when they give birth, so they can speak in a more nurturing tone of voice. Is this why homosexuals have effeminate voices?
  6. With respect, don't be afraid to read something if you're scared it might be true. The story they've made, ie 'is it right or wrong to look this closely at people', may be rubbish. As apposed to just sharing news of the new technology. As such, it's clearly not rubbish. There are many things about our physical makeup that giveaway things about us. When they say 'don't judge a book by its cover', that's not true. You can absolutely learn things about a person. Why would nature want our sexual orientation to be secret?
  7. Joshua Suarez--Sagging Pants Prank

    Why do people actually think this is a prank? I wouldn't mind if he said at the end that it was just a skit, but he doesn't, so it's dishonest. The whole basis for the video is to poke fun at sagging. The sagger makes weak arguments to make himself look stupid. It's also portrays the idea of him lowering the other guy's pants as out of order. But the other guy is apparently within his rights to adjust the sagger's pants? They'd probably like to F**** eachother, if they're honest enough to admit it.
  8. Whilst it would be invasive to begin with, we don't actually need our orientation to be so personal. We are in fact already assuming that everyone is straight. So for those who are, they are having the personal orientation made public anyway. For those aren't straight but are assumed to be, they of course have even bigger problems. At current people with a minority sexual preference, eg homosexuals, are subject to discrimination if they come out as gay, or living a suppressed life if they can't come out as gay. Given that most countries have now decriminalised homosexuality and made laws for discriminating against it. Having everyone being seen as gay if they are, just as black people are seen as black, would stop people form having to come out as gay. Those who don't come out, usually down to on their personality style making them more conformative and less definitive, would benefit from being free. But most of all, there really are far more homosexuals than people relalise. So most remaining homophobia would be quashed at the point people realise there is usually about one gay person in every family. It's really important to relalise that society is pretty tolerant today. But that tolerance extends only to people that have come out as gay. At no point does anyone ask the question; are there people out there living in prison? People see LGBT as a drive for equality such as the right to get married etc. But what about the homosexuals living a lie? Is the biggest issue for a gay person really going to be that they had to wait to get married because it was not allowed 10 years ago? Or is it that it took them years to come out, the hardest thing they'd ever done, fear of rejection from their family and friends, that to some extent is always true. Years of adolescents wasted whilst they had to date the opposite sex, secretly longing for something everyone around them hated. Why is coming out celebrated as if the the person has only just become gay at the point they came out? If someone comes out, a person should say holy F****, you had been having to live a lie for all this time? And I'd always assumed you were straight, making it so much more difficult for you. LGBT should be about equality AND irradiating suppression.
  9. Computer algorithms can analyse a person's face and detect if they are gay or straight. With 90% accuracy. Are you for or against such technology? Imagine if no one had to live a lie or come out as gay, because everyone already knew what everyone was. Perhaps other groups that have been subject to discrimination and oppression are fortunate in that way. Obvious to see if someone is a women or a black person. I don't believe society realises just how many homosexuals there actualy are. In the long run, this would almost irradiate 90% of issues regarding homosexuality. A bit like removing a band-aid. Should we roll out this software everywhere, for all to use? https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/sep/07/new-artificial-intelligence-can-tell-whether-youre-gay-or-straight-from-a-photograph
  10. Should I?

    Pain from being fucked up the ass?
  11. That's great, thanks for sharing. It's actually crazy just how often feminists are left speechless when you throw a few facts at them. I wonder if most feminists are just suppressed lesbians in denial, lashing out at men because they hate that they aren't attracted to them.
  12. I must share this one too. Super aware guy who is clearly too open-minded to have swallowed any crap from the education system. Teacher gets owned.
  13. Please share, maybe it can top this one
  14. Should I?

    Oh right, well only you know if you're up for it or not. I'll give you a pat on the back either way.
  15. Should I?

    Broadcast what? You sagging, making a porno, playing cod? Showing your face or no? Elaborate, I'm stupid.
×

Important Information

Welcome to Saggerworld.com and thanks for popping by. It would be great for you to create a FREE account, However by using this site as a guest, you must still agree to our Terms of Use.