Musings about "The Big Picture"

Historical insights & thoughts about the world we live in - and the social conditioning exerted upon us by past and current propaganda.

Re: Musings about "The Big Picture"

Unread postby simonshack on Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:27 am

Admin notice : Bumping this topic just to make everyone aware that I have put it together with various posts from these last days which, I believe, needed their own thread. Hope it's ok with all. Please read my introductory post on page1.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6730
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Musings about "The Big Picture"

Unread postby Gracist on Mon Jun 27, 2011 11:07 am

simonshack wrote:Admin notice : Bumping this topic just to make everyone aware that I have put it together with various posts from these last days which, I believe, needed their own thread. Hope it's ok with all. Please read my introductory post on page1.


I'm very happy you created this Big Picture thread. Now I don't feel guilty for going so off-topic in the other thread but I can muse away here :)
Gracist
Banned
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 1:58 pm

Re: Musings about "The Big Picture"

Unread postby Gracist on Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:26 pm

I thought that rather than starting a whole thread about this it would fit well here in the general big picture thread. I want to discuss briefly the death of Ryan Dunn because as soon as I heard about the circumstances of his death it had elements that popped out immediately to me to be ritual in nature.

First, it happened at 3 AM on route 322 ("witching hour" and the number of skull and bones) while he was driving a Porsche 911. It was also on June 20th which is during the summer solstice ritual Litha that requires a burnt human sacrifice. The reports were that he burned to death in the car or at least that the car was completely burned after the crash.

I also found on the dickhouse website a "quiz" that was posted so you could see how much of a Jackass (fan) you are by being able to identify the cast members. Dunn was shown as number 11 on the quiz. The quiz answer picture shown above was also posted to the dickhouse website at 11:09 AM, which strikes me as a pretty creepy coincidence.

Image

Here is a short article that sums up what I found as well:

http://justifytheory.blogspot.com/2011/ ... ifice.html
Gracist
Banned
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 1:58 pm

Re:

Unread postby guivre on Mon Jun 27, 2011 6:07 pm

Dcopymope wrote:All assumptions with no backing to any of it, I however can back my argument of how our entire perception of technology or science is literary kept in the past. The quote below is from an article written in the Cosmopolitan Magazine, from february of 1929.

Babies will be produced by chemists in laboratories.
The entire institution of marriage will be changed.
We will all live to be 150.
No one will need to work more than two hours a day.
Agriculture will be abolished—except as a hobby—and all foodstuffs will be produced synthetically.
Man will be able to alter the geography or climate of the world.
Coal-mining will be an extinct industry.
A forty-eight-hour day will come into being by retarding the rotations of the earth.
Sitting in our homes we will see and hear events the world over.


The main point here is that the 1929 list is being constructed about things that will happen in the far flung future, while you have been saying that we today are being kept in the dark about what technologies the government has at its fingertips now. *That* list is fanciful science fiction though I understand what you are pointing out with the similar themes as we see in media today about attacks on marriage, life spans, etc. Unless you can prove that the government had stored away 150 year old people in 1929, or was secretly making a 48 hour day, it just doesn't apply.
guivre
Member
 
Posts: 188
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:48 pm

Re: Re:

Unread postby Dcopymope on Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:15 pm

guivre wrote:
Dcopymope wrote:All assumptions with no backing to any of it, I however can back my argument of how our entire perception of technology or science is literary kept in the past. The quote below is from an article written in the Cosmopolitan Magazine, from february of 1929.

Babies will be produced by chemists in laboratories.
The entire institution of marriage will be changed.
We will all live to be 150.
No one will need to work more than two hours a day.
Agriculture will be abolished—except as a hobby—and all foodstuffs will be produced synthetically.
Man will be able to alter the geography or climate of the world.
Coal-mining will be an extinct industry.
A forty-eight-hour day will come into being by retarding the rotations of the earth.
Sitting in our homes we will see and hear events the world over.


The main point here is that the 1929 list is being constructed about things that will happen in the far flung future, while you have been saying that we today are being kept in the dark about what technologies the government has at its fingertips now. *That* list is fanciful science fiction though I understand what you are pointing out with the similar themes as we see in media today about attacks on marriage, life spans, etc. Unless you can prove that the government had stored away 150 year old people in 1929, or was secretly making a 48 hour day, it just doesn't apply.


And I'm sure you also understand that man actually can alter the climate of the world and you can actually see and hear events the world over from the comfort of your home, but I guess this as well as the rest of the other things discussed in that article which have come true as well, is "fanciful science fiction". :rolleyes:

The Company of Howard Hughes’ Climate Change Fight - Old Govt Documentation On Geoengineering

And Geoengineering is STILL being sold to us as if its new. :lol:

As far as them making a 48 hour day, looking at what’s already happened, it wouldn't surprise me if they are actually trying to, since these loons seem to be into everything we can possibly imagine. When this guy says that "we" will be able to live to 150 years, that doesn't include us, he's talking about his little clique. They always talk of becoming as gods to live forever to perfect that which god left imperfect in nature in their minds, that means everything on earth, and they don't plan on having a lot of us around in it in the end, if any. Those of us they do plan on keeping alive will be a bunch of brain chipped Borg’s. Essentially it will be them as original humans, the Borg and a bunch of lab created gremlins working the fields along with high tech robots, all controlled by a central computer, which itself will be run by a biological brain. There is no fantasy here; this has all been discussed by them.

Important video: What is Transhumanism?
Dcopymope
Banned
 
Posts: 670
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:59 am

Re:

Unread postby Guerrero on Tue Jun 28, 2011 4:37 am

Gracist wrote:But I don't understand why or how the idea of man and woman being married as ideal has been destroying itself "thankfully" for decades. Nothing is perfect but why such harsh terms toward heterosexuality but homosexuality is considered so natural and its good that its replacing "boring" heterosexual relationships? If homosexuality is so normal and good then why would it need the constant promotion to make it seem so great?'


I'm seriously sick of this promotion of homosexuality via mass media and chemically altered foods. It's like it's not okay anymore in any circle to denounce homosexuality as one would denounce meth addiction. I've personally observed an increasing amount of homosexuals (people like to argue that it's really just an effect of them 'coming out of the closet' - but I tend to disagree). I think it's self-destructive behavior just as meth addiction is and these behaviors ultimately affect community then society at large. I'm sorry that this isn't "politically correct" but that's just the problem. It's becoming to the point where if one criticizes any aspect of it at all, they are demonized as close-minded rednecks...it's kinda like the holocaust effect. :o
Guerrero
Member
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 3:05 am

Re: Musings about "The Big Picture"

Unread postby nonhocapito on Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:46 am

Homosexuality is just a lot closer to the surface now. Let's not forget that people looked for this liberation from hypocrisy for a long time. Now it happened, it is only normal that it happened somewhat in the wrong way. Whenever things went right the first time in human history? Overtime we always tend to 'normalize' things. These are times of great transformation, and the emphasis fatally lays on what changes. I don't think the real problems men and women have, in their families and in their love lives, can be blamed on the visibility of homosexuality.

Certainly there is a lot of money in it, via fashion, cosmetic products, lifestyle etc. Suddenly men are big spenders on stuff that was reserved mostly to women, and our friends the corporations cannot but encourage that. But I am not sure the numbers are that different from those of previous generations. In the rural area where I live all the old local men look "macho" enough, and yet it is well known that quite a number of these fifty-sixty-seventy years old meet in the woods along the banks of the river for a little homosexual fun that sometimes unfortunately ends in the local newspapers, because they harass some teenager going by with his bicycle. So much for the good ol' men of the good ol' times. They have more fun than their wives, that's for sure, and this part of the story hasn't changed.

As to the 'promotion of homosexuality' via 'altered food': I am aware that chemical products such as Bisphenol A, present in almost all sorts of plastic containers especially used for food, are linked to hormonal dysfunction in females and males. But the rate of which this element leaks from the containers to the food is not clear and fluctuates. Bottom line, if there was an evil elite willing to turn the population into homosexuals, are really plastic containers the way to do it? Not to play naive, but couldn't this be yet another tragic accident of the too-fast rate of growth of the packaging and consumer industries? Isn't a good sign the fact that we can talk about this and be informed about this? Why said elite would allow such information to circulate?

Rather than focusing on homosexuality, I'd say that I see a lot of unhappiness in relationships, in sexual life and in love life. I tend to attribute it to the growing inability that people have of talking sincerely to one another, because the moments of conviviality and reciprocal visibility are thinned out desperately by television and other media. It was not long ago when people would spend a lot of time together in games and conversations, something that the TV almost entirely wiped out. There are characters on TV playing games now.
People seem to grow more and more incapable of seeing one another with the necessary amount of empathy, and more and more incapable to speak about themselves in a non-hypocrite, non-fictional way. Men turn to porn and prostitutes, women to romantic movies and shopping. Couples are generally unhappy. I still have to find an happy marriage that doesn't stink of fakery.

Well, differently from our discourse on the "extermination" of humanity, I do see a bit of design in this unhappiness: if only because the unhappy individual is a bigger consumer. And maybe also because the unhappy will be less likely to fight back when losing his family or job. And understandably. "What, fight for this? You can have it!" -- and so on and so forth.
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

Re: Re:

Unread postby Gracist on Tue Jun 28, 2011 11:13 am

Guerrero wrote:
Gracist wrote:But I don't understand why or how the idea of man and woman being married as ideal has been destroying itself "thankfully" for decades. Nothing is perfect but why such harsh terms toward heterosexuality but homosexuality is considered so natural and its good that its replacing "boring" heterosexual relationships? If homosexuality is so normal and good then why would it need the constant promotion to make it seem so great?'


I'm seriously sick of this promotion of homosexuality via mass media and chemically altered foods. It's like it's not okay anymore in any circle to denounce homosexuality as one would denounce meth addiction. I've personally observed an increasing amount of homosexuals (people like to argue that it's really just an effect of them 'coming out of the closet' - but I tend to disagree). I think it's self-destructive behavior just as meth addiction is and these behaviors ultimately affect community then society at large. I'm sorry that this isn't "politically correct" but that's just the problem. It's becoming to the point where if one criticizes any aspect of it at all, they are demonized as close-minded rednecks...it's kinda like the holocaust effect. :o


Yes I totally agree with you. I think homosexuality is trendy now (also the invented "bi-sexuality" which is just a euphemism for extreme promiscuity) and that the rates are increasing (I do think it is a choice and not an inborn thing more often than not) because of promotion and not just more are being open about it. Its like all the people saying the increase in autism is just from better diagnosis and not chemical poisons/vaccines.
Gracist
Banned
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 1:58 pm

Re: Musings about "The Big Picture"

Unread postby Gracist on Tue Jun 28, 2011 11:51 am

nonhocapito wrote:Homosexuality is just a lot closer to the surface now. I don't think the real problems men and women have, in their families and in their love lives, can be blamed on the visibility of homosexuality.


I don't think that couples never had problems before or that all problems in relationships are due to the visibility of homosexuality but I think that there is a concerted effort to create a chasm between men and women even further to destabilize the family and society at large and one tool they are using is homosexuality. Its a lot closer to the surface because the media makes sure to way over represent homosexuality and always in the context of it being good. When is the last time you saw a gay character on tv that was the villain?


As to the 'promotion of homosexuality' via 'altered food': I am aware that chemical products such as Bisphenol A, present in almost all sorts of plastic containers especially used for food, are linked to hormonal dysfunction in females and males. But the rate of which this element leaks from the containers to the food is not clear and fluctuates. Bottom line, if there was an evil elite willing to turn the population into homosexuals, are really plastic containers the way to do it? Not to play naive, but couldn't this be yet another tragic accident of the too-fast rate of growth of the packaging and consumer industries? Isn't a good sign the fact that we can talk about this and be informed about this? Why said elite would allow such information to circulate?


They allow information to circulate because it doesn't matter if we know about it we aren't the ones producing plastic bottles what can we do with the information other than bitch about it? People know but continue to drink from plastic and eat canned food that is lined with it so it doesn't really matter if we know about it. Plastic bottles aren't the only problem anyway there are tons of chemicals that are endocrine disruptors along with the pharmaceuticals and the hormones and such in food and water. Combined with brainwashing from young ages at school and on tv and in music there is a multi-level attack on heterosexuality and the outcome of heterosexual relationships which are children and families.

Also they write about this openly they just know most people either A) don't read and won't find out what they are saying or B) even if they do read it or find out otherwise most people will still not believe it because it is "too horrible to really be real". Just like even in the face of undeniable evidence people won't believe 911 was faked. Read "The effect of science on society" by Bertrand Russel where he talks about how they will use diet along with injections to mold society into a bunch of passive sheep like animals that they can control to think whatever they want them to think. He said even if people are unhappy they will think they are happy if the government tells them so, etc. So they know exactly what they are doing with the chemicals its not just some unforeseen accidental outcome of the growth of packaging.

Rather than focusing on homosexuality, I'd say that I see a lot of unhappiness in relationships, in sexual life and in love life. I tend to attribute it to the growing inability that people have of talking sincerely to one another, because the moments of conviviality and reciprocal visibility are thinned out desperately by television and other media. It was not long ago when people would spend a lot of time together in games and conversations, something that the TV almost entirely wiped out.


I agree with you on the role of television in the breakdown of communication between people and the lack of communication abilities being a cause of unhappiness in relationships. I think it is by design that even in restaurants and social places people go to be together every wall is covered with tvs which are distracting and interrupt conversation. Its odd to go to a bar or restaurant and see people sitting at a table together staring at a tv!

And maybe also because the unhappy will be less likely to fight back when losing his family or job. And understandably. "What, fight for this? You can have it!" -- and so on and so forth.


This is a very important point. If a man has a family, even if his marriage isn't perfect, he may still fight to protect it and his children. What if he has no family though? What if he has no children? What cause would he have to fight back against the system? Strong militaristic nations that go out conquering have always promoted homosexuality because they want a strong bond between the men and an allegiance to the male organization/military and not to families. That's why they would sodomize the young boys to initiate them into the behavior (its not inborn its learned hence the need for promotion and propaganda.) The whole men are for love women are for children thing. I think that is another aspect to the homosexual promotion and why the US military has made open homosexuality legal and why they have announced the gays will live in the same barracks as the heteros.
Gracist
Banned
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 1:58 pm

Re: Musings about "The Big Picture"

Unread postby Gracist on Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:30 pm

Playboy and the (Homo) Sexual Revolution

June 17, 2011

by Henry Makow Ph.D.
(This essay was originally published in 2001)

What kind of man is this?

He is fastidious about his appearance, his home and his possessions. He wants as much sex as possible and chooses sexual partners mostly on the basis of appearance. He is self-absorbed and doesn't want emotional involvement or commitment. He thinks a woman would stifle him and children would be a burden.

Does this sound like many gays? It is also the masculine ideal purveyed by Playboy magazine to men since the 1950's.

The essence of manhood is to lead and support a family. But in 1972, 3 out of 4 male college students got their ideas about masculinity from Playboy, at an incalculable price to themselves, women, children and society.

The similarity between the Playboy and homosexual ideal is no coincidence. "The Kinsey Report" (1948) shaped current mainstream attitudes to sex. It championed unfettered sexual expression and became the manifesto of the counterculture. It inspired Hugh Hefner to start Playboy in 1953.

Essentially "The Kinsey Report" said that aberrant sexual behavior was so common as to be normal. Thanks to psychologist Dr. Judith Reisman, we now know that Alfred Kinsey was a homosexual and the "Kinsley Report" was a fraud.

Kinsey, a University of Indiana zoologist, pretended to be a Conservative family man. In fact, he seduced his male students and forced his wife and associates to perform in homemade pornographic films. To prove that children have legitimate sexual needs. Kinsey and his fellow pedophiles either abused 2,000 infants and children and/or relied on data obtained in Nazi concentration camps. (Judith Reisman, Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences, 1998, p.312)

Reisman concludes: "America's growing libidinous pathologies...taught in schools...and reflected in our fine and popular arts, the press, law and public policy largely mirror the documented sexual psychopathologies of the Kinsey team itself."

Sponsored by the Rockefeller Foundation, Kinsey's goal was "to supplant what he saw as a narrow procreational Judeo Christian era with a promiscuous "anything goes" bi/gay pedophile paradise." ( Reisman, Crafting Gay Children: An Inquiry, p.4 He cruised Times Square looking for subjects. More than 25% of his sample were prostitutes and prison inmates including many sex offenders. Kinsey, who died prematurely of disease associated with impotence and self-mutilation (orchitis, Reisman p. 278), said 10 per cent of American men were gay when in fact only two per cent were.

Hugh Hefner said the Kinsey Report "produced a tremendous sexual awakening, largely because of media attention..." This shows how the elite orchestrates social change using media hype. (See Reisman, Kinsey, p.307)

With messianic fervor, Playboy took its gospel of sexual freedom to the American male who in the 1950's-1960's still consecrated sex for marriage. Playboy's aim, the aim of all pornographers, was to hook men on the glossy fantasy. To do this, they had to prevent them from finding true satisfaction in marriage.

In Reisman's words, "Playboy was the first national magazine to exploit college men's fears of women and family commitment. Playboy offered itself as a reliable, comforting substitute for monogamous heterosexual love." (Judith Reisman, "Soft Porn Plays Hardball," p 47)

Thus sworn enemies, Playboy and radical feminists, found common ground in hatred of the nuclear family. As a result, society now suffers from epidemics of family breakdown, pornography, impotence, child sexual abuse, sadosexual violence, teen pregnancy, a cocktail of STD's and, of course, AIDS. The birthrate has plummeted by 50% since 1960 and is barely at replacement level.

Homosexuality is a developmental disorder defined by the failure to establish a permanent bond with a member of the opposite sex. Psychologist Richard Cohen, in "Coming Out Straight: Understanding and Healing Homosexuality" (2000) argues it is caused when a male child fails to bond with his father. By having sex with men, the adult gay is trying to compensate for father-love denied in adolescence.

Cohen was gay and is now married with three children. He attributes lesbianism to a woman's reaction to being rebuffed or abused by her father. He has assisted hundreds of homosexuals, but is under constant attack for undermining the gay political agenda, (i.e. to redefine societal norms.)

Psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover has pointed to another cause of homosexuality. A 1990 survey of 1000 gays shows that an older or more powerful partner physically assaulted 37% of them before the age of 19. ("Homosexuality and American Public Life," 1999, p.24). In addition, according to Anne Moir in "Why Men Don't Iron," some men may be "born gay" due to foetal hormone imbalances. They seem to be a minority.

For many decades, gays were told that they were "sick" and cruelly and wrongly persecuted. The gay activist solution: convince the world that, in fact, it is heterosexuals who are sick. In 1973, they bullied the American Psychological Association into proclaiming homosexuality normal. Together with feminist activists (who believe heterosexuality is inherently oppressive) gay activists began to dismantle all heterosexual institutions: masculinity, femininity, marriage, the nuclear family, the boy scouts, sports, and the military.

Backed by the financial elite, gay activists and their supporters now largely dictate our cultural sensibility. They are responsible for the puerile pornographic obsession that pervades television, music videos and the Internet. This state of arrested human development is characteristic of many homosexuals. But straights have been homosexualized too. With women acting like men, and vice versa, we can't establish a "permanent bond with a member of the opposite sex" either. The elite's purpose is to promote social dysfunction and depopulation. See "Feminism and the Elite Depopulation Agenda".

Gay liberation manuals talk about "normalizing" their sexuality and "de-sensitizing" straights by flaunting it. I was livid in 1997 when I took my 10-year-old son to see Adam Sandler's movie "Billy Madison" and heard one teenage male youth in the film casually ask another: "Would you rather bone Pamela Anderson or a young Jack Nicholson?"

On TV's "Will and Grace," Jack who is gay dons an apron that says "Kiss the cook" pretending he thought the second "o" was a "c". Just as Communists once conned do-gooders to think radicalism was chic, gay activists define trendy for gullible liberals today.

Gay and feminist activists think traditional morality was invented to perpetuate an unjust status quo. In fact, morality is the accumulated wisdom of mankind regarding what is healthy and ultimately fulfilling. Perversion is deviation from what is healthy.

Heterosexual morality places sex in the context of love and/or marriage because it is healthy and human. It ensures that the most profound and intimate physical act between two people expresses a commensurate emotional-spiritual bond. Promiscuous sex is a desperate plea for love. Love and marriage answer that call and provide for the natural and necessary outcome of sex, children.

With Hugh Hefner's help, Alfred Kinsey detached sex from love and procreation. He reduced it to another physical function like urinating. Homosexual activists champion anonymous sex: a majority of gays have 10s-100s of partners each year. In less extreme form, heterosexuals have adopted this model. Recently a social columnist enviously described straight friends whose relationships have ended: "they're out partying, having the time and the sex, it seems of their lives."

In conclusion, the "sexual revolution" was really a triumph of an elite program of arrested development. See also "The CIA, Homosexuality and Underdevelopment." The elite agenda is to redefine healthy as deviant and vice-versa and they have succeeded. In 40 short years, almost all sexual constraints have dissolved and heterosexual society is reeling. The cultural and social breakdown will only get worse unless there is a counterrevolution.

Example of culture creation/brainwashing children:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... types.html
Gracist
Banned
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 1:58 pm

Re: Musings about "The Big Picture"

Unread postby bostonterrierowner on Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:23 pm

I have been following your posts about promotion of homosexuality and culture changing/creating through mass media and I want to share some of my thoughts regarding the subject with you. First of all I have to remind everyone that I am Polish and Poland is supposedly the most catholic country in the world. Why do I say this? I am being a witness of a big sociological change in my nation especially its youthful part . I was born in Warsaw in late 70s and have always been aware of homosexuals existing around me at least since I turned 10:) There was a notorious public WC in one of Warsaw's main squares which was a meeting point for this kind of people and sometimes I overheard my parents saying that this or that celebrity is gay / lesbian but generally that was it :) There was never state official persecution of homesexuals , like eg. UK , Romania , USSR but people of this sexual orientation lived their lives without going public or manifesting their preferences. Sometimes I could tell that somebody is a "homo" by the way he walked or talked and just wasnt able to conceal his /her homosexuality. I need to add that I am a Warsovian and Warsaw is the biggest and most cosmopolitan of polish cities hence the most tolerant. Let me get to the point. Recently , I mean the last 5 -7 years things changed a lot. I can even risk the statement that being gay ( mainly male ) is in fashion now. Feminine and girlish looking boys and young men can be seen in big numbers in Warsaw's clubs , schools and on the streets. My friend's 18 year old sister told me a story about the guy she has a crash on , making up with another guy through the whole party recently! Its just unbelievable to me. When I was in high school things like this would have never happened. These two boys would be probably given a beating and their time in school afterwards would be miserable. But now its being reported as no such a big deal. Complete perception change in just 15 years. When I was a kid the term "faggot" was a common insult and I am sure lots of guys with homosexual tendencies were hiding them . Still my friend's sister is insisting that her beau is not gay he was just fucking around :) Wow! If one witnesses such a social paradigm change in a "conservative" and catholic nation like mine its obvious that it doesnt just happen. Hence I have to admit that homosexuality is being promoted through mass media. MTV , Idol , Facebook etc . are the main culprits. I live in Warsaw and it means that my findings are not representative to the whole country. But still , youths are completely different now than lets say 15 years ago. It is now cool to be gay , I suppose

Anyways just my observations
bostonterrierowner
Member
 
Posts: 849
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 10:01 pm

Re: Musings about "The Big Picture"

Unread postby Gracist on Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:47 pm

bostonterrierowner wrote:I have been following your posts about promotion of homosexuality and culture changing/creating through mass media and I want to share some of my thoughts regarding the subject with you. First of all I have to remind everyone that I am Polish and Poland is supposedly the most catholic country in the world. Why do I say this? I am being a witness of a big sociological change in my nation especially its youthful part . I was born in Warsaw in late 70s and have always been aware of homosexuals existing around me at least since I turned 10:) There was a notorious public WC in one of Warsaw's main squares which was a meeting point for this kind of people and sometimes I overheard my parents saying that this or that celebrity is gay / lesbian but generally that was it :) There was never state official persecution of homesexuals , like eg. UK , Romania , USSR but people of this sexual orientation lived their lives without going public or manifesting their preferences. Sometimes I could tell that somebody is a "homo" by the way he walked or talked and just wasnt able to conceal his /her homosexuality. I need to add that I am a Warsovian and Warsaw is the biggest and most cosmopolitan of polish cities hence the most tolerant. Let me get to the point. Recently , I mean the last 5 -7 years things changed a lot. I can even risk the statement that being gay ( mainly male ) is in fashion now. Feminine and girlish looking boys and young men can be seen in big numbers in Warsaw's clubs , schools and on the streets. My friend's 18 year old sister told me a story about the guy she has a crash on , making up with another guy through the whole party recently! Its just unbelievable to me. When I was in high school things like this would have never happened. These two boys would be probably given a beating and their time in school afterwards would be miserable. But now its being reported as no such a big deal. Complete perception change in just 15 years. When I was a kid the term "faggot" was a common insult and I am sure lots of guys with homosexual tendencies were hiding them . Still my friend's sister is insisting that her beau is not gay he was just fucking around :) Wow! If one witnesses such a social paradigm change in a "conservative" and catholic nation like mine its obvious that it doesnt just happen. Hence I have to admit that homosexuality is being promoted through mass media. MTV , Idol , Facebook etc . are the main culprits. I live in Warsaw and it means that my findings are not representative to the whole country. But still , youths are completely different now than lets say 15 years ago. It is now cool to be gay , I suppose

Anyways just my observations


Thank you for your observations! :) I agree with you and also have seen similar changes happen. Here is another recent article I found that helps to explain why this is happening so fast.

Confusing teens about their gender: the radical new French high school curriculum

by Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent

Jeanne Smits

PARIS, France, May 26, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - As of next September, the new official French science curriculum will require all 11th grade students preparing the Baccalaureate – a majority of French teenagers – to study a number of themes more closely related to gender ideology and aggressive sex education than to nature studies.

Two main headings, “Feminine-Masculine” and “Taking charge of your sexual life together and responsibly,” make up about a third of the yearly curriculum for non-science students; they are also included in a wider program for science candidates. The program shamelessly promotes contraception, justifies abortion and defends homosexual activity.

It also minimizes differences between men and women: “Anatomic and physiological differences, caused by the influence of sexual hormones, between the masculine and the feminine brain are no more important than differences between individuals of the same sex,” is one of the “concepts” 11th graders will be expected to have understood by the time they pass public examinations.

The spirit of the curriculum is abundantly reflected in new textbooks which will be financed by public spending and distributed to pupils in all public, but also in all publicly-funded private schools – mostly Catholic – when the new school year begins.

A range of books edited by all the major textbook publishers has already been offered to school directors nationwide for them to make their choice, but none is morally acceptable: they vary from scandalous to deeply scandalous. Appalled school directors are discovering how publishers have expanded without question on gender ideology in whole chapters bearing titles like “Becoming a man or a woman”..

The message is clear: “Sexual identity” is one thing. It’s the sex socially assigned at birth - with all its “stereotypes” - according to the “biological sex.” Culture and education are shown to play a major role in this “sex assignation.” “Sexual orientation” is another thing: it is strictly “intimate” and relative to the “private sphere.” It is presented as an affair of free choice.

Most textbooks illustrate these notions with photos of androgynous teenagers and Gay Pride parades.

The idea seems to be to confuse youngsters about their identity as young men and women. Texts and pictures in all the text books dwell on the similarity between the male and the female fetus before “sexual differentiation.” They also lay heavy emphasis on rare chromosomal aberrations that produce undetermined individuals – hermaphrodites – or men with XX chromosomes and women with XY chromosomes. On the “cultural” side, examples are given of traditional societies that have invented a “third gender,” like the Polynesian “fa’afafine,” who are born male but brought up as females and who can live with a woman or with a man without ever being considered as homosexuals.

The aim of the curriculum is all too clear; it is largely underscored by frequent references to anti-hate crime laws and public organizations fighting against discrimination and “homophobia.”

On the “sex-ed” side, the curriculum and its textbooks have another objectionable purpose: to show how human beings have “mastered” procreation and should master it, be it to avoid the birth of a new human being while having pleasurable sex or be it to overcome infertility by artificial techniques.

Students will be expected to explain that the procreative act has evolved from a hormone-based instinct as seen in rats or sheep to a recreational and culturally enhanced activity as observed among primates. Mating Bonobo apes (or pygmy chimpanzees as they were previously called) are shown to act much like humans: they have relations for fun and for bonding and homosexual acts are frequent, read the textbooks. Human sexuality is portrayed as a variant on this theme: a little more complex, possibly inhibited, but no more than an animal behavior.

Chapters on condoms (“the only” way to avoid sexual infections), “100%” effective contraceptive pills, freely available morning-after pills and all types of abortion complete the picture. Pregnancy is falsely said to begin with the embryo’s implantation in the womb’s lining. Post-abortion trauma and serious side effects of “daily” hormonal contraceptives aren’t even mentioned. Test-tube fertilization, embryo-freezing and egg donation are made to appear as completely normal – one textbook takes pains to show that only the Catholic Church objects to all artificial procreation. All other types of moral judgment are totally absent.

Some Catholic school directors are now hoping for a wide and strong reaction from the Church; experience shows, however, that publicly-funded private schools tend to keep a low profile on these issues. Independent Catholic schools, which are paid for exclusively by parents, are facing another problem: although they are not obliged to follow the public curriculum, they do prepare their high-school pupils for the Baccalaureate which opens the way to universities and higher education. For those pupils who pass a science exam at the end of their 11th grade year, the difficulty will be not to expose them either to being untrue to their own conscience, or to bad marks and ideological probing on the part of examiners.

The new curriculum has been developed and gradually implemented since January 2009, when Nicolas Sarkozy’s education minister at the time, Xavier Darcos, made public a “reform” of the “lycée” or French high school.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/confus ... ool-curri/

I also wanted to add that I keep seeing arguments for human sexuality made based on the actions of other animals with Bonobos being one of the main ones. The argument always goes something like, "bonobos like chimpanzees are our closest genetic relative and they have homosexual sex all the time. That therefore proves that humans should also do that because it is "natural."" The argument fails to mention though that bonobos also frequently have sex with babies, even mothers with their own babies, of the same and opposite sex. I wonder why they fail to mention that aspect of bonobo behavior. Could it be because it wouldn't support their agenda of using other species behaviors to normalize aberrant human ones? If homos can use bonobos to support their behavior then maybe NAMBLA can use bonobos as an example to show that their perversion is "natural" and justifiable too.

The German govt. is apparently well on its way to promoting total sexual "liberation." I guess I'm just a boring vanilla homophobic prude to be disgusted by all this...

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archiv ... l/07073008
Gracist
Banned
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 1:58 pm

Re: Musings about "The Big Picture"

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:16 pm

When is the last time you saw a gay character on tv that was the villain?


Image
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5059
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Musings about "The Big Picture"

Unread postby warriorhun on Tue Jun 28, 2011 8:30 pm

Dear All,

What we are dealing with here is behaviour modification of a large part of the population, using the Media as its vehicle.
Sexual behaviour modification included.
This is the two reasons why it works:
1. People watch TV as reality. We make our decisions based on our concepts of reality. If our concept of reality is false or misled, we will make the wrong decisions by default.
2. The other thing is the copy-catting behaviour of humans. Monkey see, monkey do.

If some guy would come into your living room and started showing you pictures and telling stories, sooner or later you would ask: excuse me but who the fuck you are and what do you want from me, why are you showing me these pictures? But you do not do it regarding your TV doing exactly the same, and even if you wanted you couldn't.
Stop watching TV. More important, keep your kids away from TV: I will. And YOU tell them the real deal on life, not teachers or anchorpersons on the screen.
This is what we owe to the next generation!
warriorhun
Member
 
Posts: 514
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 9:26 pm

Re: Musings about "The Big Picture"

Unread postby Gracist on Tue Jun 28, 2011 8:42 pm

warriorhun wrote:Dear All,

What we are dealing with here is behaviour modification of a large part of the population, using the Media as its vehicle.
Sexual behaviour modification included.
This is the two reasons why it works:
1. People watch TV as reality. We make our decisions based on our concepts of reality. If our concept of reality is false or misled, we will make the wrong decisions by default.
2. The other thing is the copy-catting behaviour of humans. Monkey see, monkey do.

If some guy would come into your living room and started showing you pictures and telling stories, sooner or later you would ask: excuse me but who the fuck you are and what do you want from me, why are you showing me these pictures? But you do not do it regarding your TV doing exactly the same, and even if you wanted you couldn't.
Stop watching TV. More important, keep your kids away from TV: I will. And YOU tell them the real deal on life, not teachers or anchorpersons on the screen.
This is what we owe to the next generation!


Amen to that!
Gracist
Banned
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 1:58 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General World Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests