sex – Bruce Llama

Bill does Balcony Sex

Bruce — Sat, 14 Jun 2014 08:12:57 +0000

I just love a good laugh at the end of a busy hectic week in the real world, you know, where people have normal everyday struggles. It’s always good to swill a few beers and read something from Uncle Billy.

The abortion scourge is of course simply part of the much larger sexual revolution. The promise of free love and sex without consequences and remorse always was a lie, and we are all paying heavily for it now.

Oh? Are we? How so… do let us in on the secret to how you, Uncle Billy are paying heavily for it.

We now have epidemic levels of promiscuity, sexual diseases, teen pregnancies, abortions, busted families, broken marriages, and so on.

LOL – no we don’t! Have a look at syphilis. It didn’t reach epidemic proportions in Europe because everyone was keeping their bits to themselves. It spread real quick! And for hundreds of years, all the way up to penicillin.

A big part of the problem is that we have managed to dumb down an entire society to such a level that most folks do not actually know that 2 plus 2 in fact equals four. Or in this case, that 1 (man) plus 1 (woman) = 1 (baby – at least always potentially).

If there’s a problem with society being dumbed down it’s because christians fuckwits continue this mantra that the only place to have sex is within the confines of marriage. That thinking ignores the entire history of humanity. People need to be educated about having safe sex, not pretending that you can’t have sex until you are married.

Sexuality is always about, and has always been about, reproduction – the two are intimately connected. But we are so mentally obtuse and morally deficient that your average young person today does not even realise that sex and reproduction are two sides of the same coin.

Perhaps in your fantasy world that’s the case Billy. I think you’ll find decent parents will always make sure that their children know the consequences of having unprotected sex.

And this is not some religious observation. The diehard evolutionary atheist knows just as well that the purpose of sex in nature is to reproduce. So the fact that babies are potentially always a part of the mix when humans copulate should surprise no one.

Well, you’ve left out a bit. One of the purposes of sex is to reproduce. Sex is also a way to enjoy yourself, without reproducing. It can be for fun, it can be for love and plenty of times it’s for all three. Go figure.

Yet plenty of folks seem utterly clueless about this, and are actually surprised if a pregnancy follows intercourse. Well, duh! So in an age of rampant promiscuity and anything-goes sexuality, of course plenty of babies are turning up. And the usual answer today to deal with this is abortion.

I’d suggest to you Billy that if anyone is surprised to be pregnant after having unprotected sex then they are probably a fundamentalist christian. Again, what’s missing is education.

So the whole sexual revolution needs to be challenged big time. There are heaps of problems involved with it. And one recent story from England shows, at least obliquely, how dangerous things can be. Consider the horrific story of two teens who fell to their deaths while copulating.

The tragic story goes as follows: “Two teenagers have plunged to their death while allegedly having sex on a balcony at a luxury London apartment block. The students, named as Anastasia Tutik, 19, from Russia, and ‘Miguel’, 18, from Mexico, died instantly after falling from the sixth floor of a flat on the banks of the River Thames. The international students had just met at a party where they were celebrating their end-of-year exams.”

Yes, that’s tragic and slightly funny. But really, it just goes to show what I’ve been saying, you need to practice safe sex. If you’re going fuck on the balcony be sure you have a safety line. For Uncle Billy, the tragedy is that they weren’t married. They’d clearly only just met and where having sex for the fun of it. By way of celebration. Just like millions of people have done since the invention of contraception and no doubt people have done since they worked out how great it feels. Of course, in Billy’s mind the couple were copulating on the floor, man on top sort of thing. In my mind she was on the balcony rail with him standing in front, overcome with, well clearly it got too much and they let go.

What a bugger.

On that note, I’ll ignore the rest of his blog, it’s only about abortion and not worth the worry really.

Are you a Virgin?

Bruce — Wed, 06 Nov 2013 08:35:41 +0000

[SOURCE]

Something that christians like Great Uncle Billy the Not So Virgin Like to ask is “Are you a virgin?”

Sex is very important to him and when you have it with someone else is also really important because as far as Great Uncle Billy, NSVL, is concerned you can only have sex when you’re married. He ignores that forever people have had sex in and out of marriage, even his own god got a single woman pregnant, although apparently she was still a virgin afterwards. And who can forget Lot wanting to send his virgin daughters out to be raped by the townsfolk. Virginity is high up on the list of godly things.

So, Great Uncle Billy NSVL asks:

So what is it with people publicly selling their virginity nowadays? Have we sunk that far as a culture that people have to take the wonderful gift of sex and degrade it in such a way, just to get their 15 minutes of fame?

I’ve seen billboards everywhere about young people wanting to sell their first bonking rights, haven’t you? And why is sex a gift? It’s just what we do. Yes, it’s bloody good fun and makes you feel good. But it’s hardly a gift. Maybe I can start wrapping a ribbon around my people poker and giving it away as a gift.

Human sexuality is an intensely beautiful yet private affair – or at least should be.

Actually human sexuality isn’t so private, every time you walk down the street with the good Mrs Great Uncle Billy who we assume is no virgin, you declare your sexuality. Every time I kiss my love llama I declare my sexuality. Sometimes we do it right out in the public. Kiss that is. Sex may be private but even then it’s sort of readily available for those who don’t want much privacy.

Yet when it is paraded all over the world it is cheapened, coarsened, and dragged through the mud. Of course our culture as a whole has done a terrific job of trivialising sex, and turning this act into a mere circus sideshow. So these latest moves should not surprise us.

Oh yes, side-show. Prostitution, rape, rape inside marriage, forced marriages to have the right blood lines, sex is such a well-regarded thing Billy. What a crappy over simplified view of the world he has.

If you are not aware of what I am referring to, consider these two recent examples. The first concerns a Siberian teenager. The story goes like this: “A Russian teenager who sold her virginity through an online auction site has been given the go-ahead by police to seal the deal.

Two recent examples? You asked what is it with people selling their virginity, parading it all around the world and you give us two examples? You ask if we have sunk so far that sex is degraded and you give us two examples, and one of them isn’t even about selling virginity. Methinks you may be getting a bit excited by this Billy.

Anyway, I’ll spare you the article, in a nutshell some Siberian woman wants to sell her virginity and she’s not breaking any laws. The way Billy carries on you’d think everyone in the world was selling their first shag. And big deal. It’s not like unscrupulous people haven’t been marketing virgins. If some one wants to sell it off, why the hell not! Wish I had thought of it, I’d have made a pretty penny or two when I had a full head of Llama fur.

And an English example from last month is even more revolting. Consider this story: “A gay student plans to lose his virginity live on stage – all in the name of art. Clayton Pettet, a 19-year-old art student at Central Saint Martins College of Arts and Design in London, plans to have gay sex in front of a crowd of between 50 and 100 people in London on Jan. 25, 2014, for a project called ‘Art School Stole My Virginity,’ according to the Daily Star. He and his anonymous partner will have sex until completion and then hold a Q&A with the audience afterward.

So, for some strange reason, this rather out there ‘gay’ individual is going to have his first ‘gay’ sex on stage. It’s in the name of art, so it’s ok. No one is being harmed, it’s not like Clayton is going to be able to do it more than once. I can’t see an issue here. Again, it’s one virgin having sex on stage in the name of art. Not the whole world.

So what can one say? One is left dumbfounded by the sexual perversion and moral freefall occurring all around us.

How about you say nothing? No one is asking you to go to the play or to buy a young girls virginity. It’s not clear just what the sexual perversion is. Granted, both are a little different and odd, but it’s not the same as having sex with a rampant alpaca now is it? There is nothing perverse here. One girl wants to have sex with a man and get some money for it, one man wants to have sex with his boy friend on stage. Nothing perverse as such.

The really tragic thing is nobody seems to be shocked by this sort of stuff anymore. No one seems to care and even raise an eyebrow about such things.

But I think that’s where you are wrong, people are shocked, or at the very least raising an eyebrow. The reason this even makes the news is because it’s different, odd, unusual. If it was as common as getting a speeding ticket then we’d never hear about it. However, it’s still a non-issue. We all fuck and we all do it for the first time. For 99.99% of the population it’s with someone special, that first time, for the rest of us its a bit more out there. That is indeed remarkable in the current culture. When you can buy a virgin on the street or get two for the price of one, then we can talk about moral outrage. We’d need to be charging GST for starters.

Our culture has reached such a point of moral and spiritual disintegration that we read an item like this in the newspaper as we would the daily weather report. Our capacity to exhibit some moral outrage at our decadent and dying society seems to have all but disappeared.

Our culture is disintegration because two people are loosing their virginity is unconventional ways? Really? And what point has been reached? Two people. TWO FUCKING PEOPLE, that’s it. The suggestion that you read it like you read the weather report is laughable. I’m not sure what’s sadder, that you still get your weather from the newspaper or that you think this story is mundane everyday life.

How many more young lives must be ruined before we wake up as a culture and start saying enough is enough?

Two young people are doing it, and just maybe this will be the thing that enhances their lives. Our Russian friend will no doubt move to a bigger and better place and perhaps get a decent education with her winnings, and the gay stage-fucking homosexual may be the next Superman. Who knows. It’s doubtful that their lives will be in ruin because the Great Uncle Billy NSVL doesn’t approve of sexy things.

What is a really good case for enough is enough however, is for ratbags like Great Uncle Billy NSVL taking the high road in some mock outrage. Pretending to care about things that don’t actually matter. Perhaps he could spend some time considering how to help the 9.3 million people in Syria that need humanitarian assistance.

May your first fuck be glorious.

Grossman asks the questions

Bruce — Fri, 28 Jun 2013 03:28:25 +0000

Miriam Grossman is an MD her little catch phrase is “100% MD, 0% PC.” Nice.

She’s a nutter.

I’ve written about her before. But pretty well she thinks it’s her job to take vulnerable, questioning young people and turn them into heterosexuals. She thinks it’s her job to deny that teenagers should have sex and that the only place to wave people pokers around is in the confines of a marriage.

In one of her latest posts she asks three questions of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), an organisation that is composed of 60,000 primary care paediatricians, paediatric medical subspecialists and paediatric surgical specialists dedicated to the health, safety and well-being of infants, children, adolescents and young adults.

Fair enough that our non-PC MD would want to ask some questions about sexuality and gender identity when dealing with young people. The AAP has just released an updated policy statement on the care for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning youth. Read about it here.

Our good MD asks her questions:

You state that a teen who questions if he is male or female, or who wants his genitalia removed, is “normal, just different.”

Let’s stop you there. Here’s what they say under their recommendations in their policy document:

Pediatricians should be available to answer questions, to correct misinformation, and to provide the context that being LGBTQ is normal, just different.

When it comes to having your bits removed it’s not as easy as fronting up to the doctor and saying I want my junk cut off, in fact they say this:

Supportive counseling is paramount to assist the teenager with any dysphoria and to explore gender roles before altering the body. The therapy consists of potentially delaying puberty with gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs, then use of hormonal therapy, and finally surgery.

And they footnote their recommendation with a reference to the World Professional Association for Transgender Health. So I guess you’re statement is right, normal, just different, but they need to correct misinformation. It’s the responsible thing to do.

That was just the opening sentence, now to the first question:

Given the physical differences between male and female are more substantial than between different races, if an African American teen is convinced she is really Caucasian, is she also “normal, just different?” Should her pediatrician affirm her belief, and support her wish for facial surgery and skin bleaching?

I think you’ll find that this isn’t a problem anywhere near the same as sexual identity. Nowhere do we find a family of white people saying to their children, “don’t you grow up black. We’ll disown you.” Nowhere do you hear, “well ok, if you want to marry a black she’ll need to have her face bleached. We’ll lend you the money.” And tell me Dr. MD with 0PC, how does a white woman come up with an idea that a teenage black teen wants to be white?

On to question two.

2. If my son thinks he’s a girl, you recommend I find a therapist who will respect and affirm his belief.

But if my son is attracted to boys, and his urges feel foreign and distressing, you advise me to find a therapist who will tell him “this is who you are, accept it.”

Honestly, does that make sense?

I couldn’t find the quote “this is who you are, accept it” anywhere in the documentation. Perhaps you’re just making a quote up? What I do find are words like this:

Homophobia and heterosexism may damage the emerging self-image of an LGBTQ adolescent. Homophobia perceived by LGBTQ youth may lead to self-destructive behaviors

I think it may be best to discover why his urges feel foreign and distressing.

And this:

Another critically important role of the pediatrician is to assist parents of sexual minority youth. Pediatricians should acknowledge the parents’ feelings but should provide information and support for the adolescent who has disclosed. Parents’ reactions and attitudes may adjust over time.

and:

Many adolescents struggle with their sexual attractions and identity formation, and some may be referred to as “questioning.”

and:

If a pediatrician does not feel competent to provide specialized care for sexual minority teenagers and their families, he or she has the responsibility to evaluate families and then refer for medically appropriate care.

So nowhere is there a suggestion that a young gay or questioning man should just accept it. In answer to your question, “honestly, does that make sense” the answer is no. Your question is wrong.

Perhaps our MD hasn’t enough time to read the 8 page policy document, page 1 is a cover page, pages 6, 7 and 8 are footnotes, so really, just read pages 2 through to 5. Only takes a couple of minutes and all your questions would be answered.

How to use tragedy to push your religion – Ray Comfort gets it wrong!

Bruce — Sat, 16 Mar 2013 00:26:37 +0000

[SOURCE]

Recently a man in New Zealand died after he was horrifically attacked and eaten by a shark. The atheist, however, can’t blame God for creating the shark, because (in his mind) God doesn’t exist. He has to say that this tragedy was the cold result of the evolutionary process. It was a matter of survival of the fittest. The shark simply ate a primate who was in his territory. The Christian, however, has a different worldview. This terrible death of a human being confirms that we live in a “fallen” creation, under the curse of Genesis–where sharks devour people. So do lions and tigers. Snakes kill, bees sting, mosquitoes suck blood and spread disease, crocodiles bite your arm off, and bears rip open your rib cage. There are a whole lot of other nasty predators that will eat you for dinner, if you get into their territory or if they are hungry enough to come into yours. While evolution rests on faith because the believer has to believe what he’s been told about old bones, about theories and dating data, we can “observe” Genesis chapter 1 in the existing creation and in the fossil record. Not only is the curse observable, but we see male and female in every kind and all of them reproduce after their own kind, just as the Scriptures say. It’s all readily observable in Nature. None of it needs faith.

And so says the ratbag New Zealand jewish christian pastor Ray Comfort. A man who has dedicated his life to being confused.

He thinks bananas are an atheist nightmare because they slip into your hand so well.

To his quote above from his Facebook profile. Comfort suggests that the death of the New Zealander was the cold result of the evolutionary process. The death of Adam Strange is indeed tragic, it caused a great deal of trauma for those who stood by and watched him attacked and killed. It wasn’t about the survival of the fittest, it was about nature doing what it does. Comfort hints at an atheist being cold and unmoved by this death, whereas a christian is somehow better placed to see the death as part of gods plan. He goes on to suggest that we are under the curse of Genesis, a curse derived from his rather cold god.

He says that it’s because Eve ate the fruit of the tree in the middle of a garden, where his god planted the fucking thing, that the shark ate a man. In Ray’s mind 6,000 years ago this happened. After all the generations we are still cursed because his god couldn’t get it right.

In some mind-twist that surely must hurt, he then says that evolution requires faith, whereas the believing in god has evidence. The bible is evidence. And why? Because we can observe the result of animals having sex. The offspring is observable, the bible says:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

See! The bible says so. Of course, it has nothing to do with the authors actually observing the universe from their goat-herding fucking ways and noticing that when you have sex with your own species you then have babies, when you have sex with the goats you don’t. It was going on all around them so they wrote it down.

I much prefer DifficultNerds theory on banana peeling. That’s very observable.

Another Crazy Catholic is Smug

Bruce — Wed, 02 Jan 2013 09:37:52 +0000

[SOURCE] Sacerdotus left a message on my blog on Christmas day, I only just read it today, and then went off to visit the website of said Sacerdotus. The blogger is catholic and seems to have the jesus virus bad, and loves the pope. Â Lots. One of the recent entries is about LGBT. Â Let’s have a read!

“LGBT” is an acronym that lists the different categories of identities within the homosexual umbrella – Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual and Transsexual. Â However, I want to transform it into something better. LETÂ GODÂ BEÂ THERE.

Oh, I see what you did there, I suppose you think you’re clever!

I invite my brothers and sisters in the homosexual community to allow God to work in their lives.

I’m not your brother and I dismiss your faith as irrelevant. Â There is no god to work in your life or my life.

Unfortunately, there is a bit ofÂ animosityÂ between the LGBT community and what they are told God is. Â The Old Testament does have harsh words regarding homosexual behavior. Â Catholicism and other Christians speak out against homosexuality with such fervor that we are sometimes looked upon as bigots of hateful people.

You are bigots and hateful people. All the way up to your pope who blames gay people for all sorts of things wrong with the world. Â And the old testament doesn’t just have harsh words, it wants to put gay people to death. Â Go check.

In reality, we areÂ neitherÂ Â We are merely calling all to live in accordance with the natural law which is ordained by God.

Well good for you, now fuck off and keep it to yourself. Â You are in no position to ‘merely call’ anyone to live in accordance with the natural law. Â God and natural law have no right being in the same sentence.

The Catholic Church teaches that homosexual feelings are not a sin. Â It is a sin when they are acted upon.

Sin is such a christian thing. Â There is nothing wrong with having sex and there is no such thing as sin.

We still do not know what exactly causes some to be homosexuals.

Causes? Â Who cares, the reality is that we have people from all over the world and all through time who are gay. Â The cause is of no importance to those people. Â Being able to live without fear is important.

Â Psychologists are stuck on the issue and feel it is a combination of nature and nurture. Â No homosexual gene has been discovered and for the most part, a homosexual’s brain is pretty much the same as a heterosexual’s in regards to function.

No heterosexual gene has been discovered either. Â Nor a gene for being a douche. Â Your quip about people’s brains sort of borders on saying that there is something wrong with the brain of a homosexual person. Â How rude!

In any event, homosexuals are not strange or evil people. Â Yes, some may act a big strange or may be different – we all are different. Â This does not give anyone the right to bully them or attack them in any shape or form. Â They are God’s children. Â Jesus died for them and opens His heart to them as He would anyone else.

And here you are, allowing your pope to blame us for the destruction of the family. Â Here you are suggesting that if we so much as touch the wobbly bits of a same-sex partner we are doomed to burn for all eternity in a hell created by your god who supposedly loves us. Â We are attacked, vilified and harassed by well meaning catholics and you still don’t get it.

We as believers in God must attack the behavior, not the people. Â Homosexuality is not a sentence to hell, but can be an opportunity for grace. Â The Catholic Church calls all to chastity, including married couples. Â This may seem hard, but it is not impossible. Â One of our greatest minds and saints, St. Augustine of Hippo said in his Confessions, “Lord make me chaste – but not yet!”

Chaste? Â Why should I give up sex? Â I’m simply not going to, and a whole bunch of people, gay and otherwise see through this sort of control. Â Then there is the loving threat that we get from catholics. Â Homosexuality is not a sentence to hell! Â but mind you, if you don’t accept grace and turn from your sinful ways then that’s where you’ll end up. Â In hell, and you’ll only have yourself to blame.

Our sexuality is important and is very powerful. Â How else can human beings reproduce if they cannot even get close to a partner? Â This is why sexual drive is so powerful in us. Â It stems from the “be fruitful and multiply” command of God. Â However, we should not be the sum of our sexuality. Â Our sexual drive should not define us or control us. Â This is why we have intellect, conscience, will and reason.

You’ll be pleased to know that sexual drive does not define most of us. Â You’ll be delighted to know that it has been like forever since sex was only about reproducing. Â In fact, humanity has gone out of its way to find ways to prevent the sperm and egg from coming together to make a baby! Â People have sex because it’s fun. Â It has very little to do with the actual breeding. Â Even the catholics have been smart enough to work that out and they too have found ways to cheat the falling pregnant thing. Â (ThinkÂ rhythmÂ method or the Billings method). Â Gay people are not the sum of their sexuality. Â They too have jobs, families and hobbies, they don’t just fuck all day long.

God is the designer of our bodies. Â Only He knows how to work them and control them that is why we must pray to God to help us whenever we are tempted to do unchaste things.

We the people more and more understand how the body works. Â The designer of the bodies that you claim is one fucked up designer. Â Why put nails on toes that can be ingrown? Â Why allow teeth to rot and hurt? Â Why make sex so good and then insist that people not do it? Â Your god seems to have fallen asleep during the design meetings.

Unfortunately, those homosexuals who “come out” and show no remorse for their actions become slaves to their sexuality. Â They categorize each other as “tops, bottoms, versatiles.” Â They are no longer persons, but instruments of sexual gratification. Â They categorize themselves as “fems, butch, twinks, bears.” Â They are no longer persons, but objects that one can pick and choose based on one’s desires.

Sex is sex. Â It’s good, you should try it. Â There is no reason for gay people not to come out. Â Why would there be a need for any remorse? Â It helps to know the type of person you’re having sex with, what do they like? Â Saves a lot of hassle later on. Â And whether you like it or not, sex is about gratification. Â Sure, sometimes it’s about love, I love my love llama, we have gratification sex and we have lovely sex too, quite often at the same time. Â What’s important is that we want to share the good times together. Â Sounds mighty fine to me.

God intended more for homosexuals than what they do among themselves. Â Unfortunately, sexual desires can be so strong that it can blind one from seeing God’s plan and the dignity of oneself and of others.

How would you know what your god intends? Â And the sexual desire, regardless of sexuality, is strong in some people. Â However, this particular catholic seems to be suggesting gays are so sex-crazedÂ that they do nothing else.

It is not the end of the world. Â Prayer can help. Â LetÂ GodÂ BeÂ ThereÂ my gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transsexual brothers and sisters. Â He will help you in life. Â He will answer your question: Why am I this way? He will help you to discover your true self so that you can take charge of your life and not be the sum of your sexuality. Gay people are not “tops, bottoms, versatiles, fems, butch, twinks or bears;” Â they are not objects for others to enjoy sexually. Â They are human beings worthy of love, respect and dignity. Â They are God’s children who are in the same struggle as everyone else. The LGBT might seem to be a lost sinful case, but that is not so: Â “…where sin increased, grace increased all the more.”Â Romans 5:20

The only person prayer helps is you. Â It helps you think you’re doing something useful while being completelyÂ useless. Â Sexuality for most people is actually a very minor part of their whole being. Â It’s only the people on the outside that have a perception of gay people being obsessed by it. Â It’s possible to be a sex object and be a worthwhile human while showing love, respect and dignity for your ‘sex object’. Â It really is. This ongoing self-righteous crap that religious people embark upon with an air of ‘truth’ is what’s wrong with the world. Â It’s the catholics who think they are the ones with the truth who show noÂ humilityÂ and parade themselves around like a prostitute in an Amsterdam brothel. Â They no more have the truth or the answers to the universe than I do. The arrogance of non-gay catholics to attempt to impose their world view on others is staggering. Â They pretend to do it with love and grace from god, but the reality is that they do it from some deep-seated need to feel superior and ‘saved’. The lot of them can take their religion and shove it up the pope’s clacker with a pointy stick and a flagon of altar wine.

Cameron Spink on Sex

Bruce — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 07:48:59 +0000

[SOURCE]

Spinksy, Spinksy, Spinksy, you really need to get out and live a little.

When Emma and I announced our engagement there were friends and family who responded in shock because we weren’t living together and presumably hadn’t slept together (these presumptions were correct). Hence some people raised with Emma their concerns about how ignorant we would be about our sexual compatibility (they never seem to raise these issues with me for some reason).

Poor Mrs Spinksy – she could have married a dud root.

I stumbled across an article today by sex therapist Matty Silver who outlined her thoughts on couples who have â€œmismatch[ing] libidosâ€. The idea that both parties should have equal â€œsex driveâ€ is at the heart of this idea of sexual compatibility. Silver’s solution to unequal â€œsex driveâ€ is good communication. And she is right, to an extent. However, her work with couples in regards to sexuality presupposes that love is merely â€œneurotransmitter phenylethylamineâ€¦.. combined with dopamine and norepinephrineâ€ to create â€œpleasingly positive feelings towards each otherâ€ Â We must be aware of our preconceived notions of what love is. It is neither defined by science nor should it be relegated to gushy feelings. Both strip love of its power.

Preconceived ideas, yes, you should be aware of them. Â How easy is Spinksy to throw out the science of love and the reality of how we feel love. Â He must have a really good basis for doing so! Oh, and you don’t stumble across articles like this, you make a decision to click the link. Â The article is from The Age and there is no stumble Spinksy, you used that free will you’re so fond of and clicked the link. Â And just so we are clear, Matty Silver knows a thing or two – she’s done training at a university and everything.

Master of Health Science (Sexual Health)
The University of Sydney

Graduate Diploma of Health Science (Sexual Health)
The University of Sydney

Graduate Diploma of Counselling and Communications
Australian College of Applied Psychology (ACAP)

I guess Matty Silver has some good research to back up her article. Â What’s Spinksy got?

In fact the Bible paints a completely different picture. Wives are to be â€œsubmissiveâ€ to their husbands (Ephesians 5:22) and husbands are to love their wives (Ephesians 5:25). These are doing concepts rather than feeling and don’t fit within romantic or scientific notions of being â€œin loveâ€. If we then move the blowtorch to the idea of sexual compatibility it is clear that the worldly perspective falls a long way short of defining how relationships should be approached in reality. We must be active in doing love not merely hoping to feel love.

Oh, the bible. Â Spinksy is basing his ideas of love on the bible? Â This is the same bible that claims god so loved the world that he sent his only son to be killed for himself to pay for the wrongs of humanity caused by his own creation. Â That sounds loving.

The reason, Spinksy me old mate, that the bible falls a long way short on the perspective of worldly love is because the authors of the bible had a very differentÂ understandingÂ of the world, because the Â University of Sydney was about 2000 years away. Â As they say, we have moved on.

Not only is sexual compatibility a myth but sexual attraction is also a dead end.

I can only assume that Emma and Spinksy are not sexually compatible. Â Whether you want to admit it or not, sexual attraction is the reason you got married, it’s the way it works. Â Just because you didn’t have pre-martial sex doesn’t mean you aren’t sexually attracted to Emma. Â In fact, without that sexual attraction, your relationship would never have started.

There are people who legitimately believe that it is important for couples to be sexually compatible. That sex must be dabbled in before the marriage night just to make sure that you are chaining yourself to the right person. We need to be rid of such immature thought-processes. A marriage commitment does not require sexual compatibility or fornication. In fact, possibly the worst thing you can do for your future marriage is to live together before you tie the knot.

Lions having sex outside marriage

Seriously Spinksy, there are a lot worse things to do in the world than live together and have sex before you get married. Â Dabbling in sex is fun, you should try it. Spinksy simply avoids the obvious truth in the world, people have sex outside and inside marriage. Â They always have. Â I would suggest that it is not all the ‘fornicators’ who have the immature thought-processes. Â Spinksy also avoids the issue that people like Matty Silver are successful because there’s a market for them. Â There are many relationships that fail, and there are many that succeed. Â I would bet that most of those that are success stories had sex a lot before they married. Â What planet are you living on Spinksy?

We need to stop giving opinions like Silver’s any credence. The world suggests many lies and we are not filtering properly. Instead we continue to play church while believing that it is important to ascertain whether we are sexually compatible with our future spouse. News flash, sexual compatibility is the mouth wash of relationships. Its invention has derailed marriage which, despite the naysayers, is an institution that is very good.

Come on. Â You can dismiss whoever you want. Â But it’s not like Matty Silver is silly. Â Perhaps there is something in her way of operating and it’s the likes of christians that need to have their opinions questioned thoroughly and then discarded like a used tissue after a private session.

Might I then present to you something radically different. Sex outside of marriage rather than helping you in your pursuit of sexual compatibility actually sets you up to fail in regards to commitment. We are being set up to fail. Our sexual desires, if we take our ques from society, will be unfulfilled. We will not get what we seek. And so, people throw their relationship under the bus if the other person in the relationship does not satisfy what cannot be satisfied. Perhaps it is worth turning the disappointment around and looking at our perceptions and how they may well be the part of the cause of the problem. Yet we cannot hope to drag our preconceived notions of sexuality out of the mire without the help of somebody uncorrupted by society. But there is no solutions available except the one who created sexuality in the first place.

FFS – I read and re-read. Â That’s just such a load of twaddle crap dipstick duck shit. Â You start by asking to present something radically different and then all you really do is rant about how bad things are. Â I think, but I’m not sure, that your radical idea is getting the help of someone uncorrupted by society – probably your god. Â That’s not radically different, that’s what we expect from religious nutters. Â Your preconceived notions are derived from a book that was written so long ago and has never been updated. Â You want us to accept sexuality as laid out in that thing? Â You seriously think that we need a solution because there is no solution, and the only one available is in the bible? Â You need to do a course on sexual health. I hear Sydney Uni has some on offer.

You see, you may believe that you can keep God away from your sex life, or indeed any part of life you may wish but it simply doesn’t work that way.

Yeah, it’s easy to keep him away, there is no god. Â And it does work that way.

If we divorce our relationship from the intentional plans of God, from His created intent, we are cheapening, abusing and condemning the relationship.

So, if a plan is intentional it’d be nice to know what it was. Â Expecting people to follow your plan when you don’t tell them what it is, is stupid.

We are using the other person, putting them on a pedestal, and when they fail (as they always do) we may call it quits or grow to resent them.

Well yes. Â It’s actually ok, good and healthy to get out of a bad relationship. Â You’re putting Emma up on the pedestal, I hope she’s secure.

Needless to say the introduction of sexual compatibility for the finding of a â€œsoulmateâ€ is a toxic concoction that has proved to be indigestible. We must throw off this charade, and encourage our friends to do so, if we want to live relationships that glorify God.

I’m not sure that the quest to find a ‘soulmate’ is such a bad thing. Â It certainly isn’t toxic, and I don’t see any evidence to prove that it is indigestible, in fact it just feels like you’re making it up as you go along.

It’s you, Spinksy, mate, that need to throw off the charade. Â Living in a relationship to glorify a being that doesn’t interact with you in anyway is crazy talk. Â Really you should focus on your life with Emma and what makes her happy. Â The love you have is to share with her, unhindered by outdated dogma and you should tap into the wealth of knowledge about relationships. Â There is so much stuff out there that will make your relationship zing.

Clearly you need more zing, otherwise your zinger will drop off.

Lively wants to Kill the Gays and the Pope Approves

Bruce — Sun, 16 Dec 2012 00:01:07 +0000

[SOURCE]

Scott Lively is one of those backward christians who really thinks that a god has come to him and saved him. Â He’s also one of the christians responsible for going to Uganda in 2009 and ‘inspiring’ the “Kill the Gays Bill”.

Through international opposition the UgandaÂ ParliamentÂ have not enacted the legislation. Â They did supposedly change their minds and remove the parts of the bill that would see gay people executed for being gay. Â However, the updated act would still see gay people locked up for life. Â Just for being gay.

It’s a completely unjustifiable penalty. Â Locking someone up because of their sexuality. Â And yet people such as Lively think it’s a good idea.

First, the Bible has always defined homosexuality as a crime, and not just in the Mosaic Law.Â Homosexuality was condemned by God long before Moses declared it a capital crime.

This is such a tired old claim. Â I reject outright any notion that the bible has any authority over my life. Â How offensive it is to use an old jumble of texts to justify your own hatred and bigotry.

Lively goes on to say:

The fact is that Ugandan law is typical of most African law in that it tends to be very harsh in the letter, but very lenient in the application.Â I doubt very much that anyone arrested under the new law (if it passes) will receive anything close to the jail terms allowed for in the bill.

Regardless of whether someone is locked up, having a law on the books that requires imprisonment for life for something between consenting adults is unjustifiable. Even if the jail sentence is one day or even a minute. Nobody should be detained or have the threat of life in prison simply for being gay.

Third, and most importantly, there is one easy, guaranteed method of protecting oneself from ever being subject to the Anti-Homosexuality law in Uganda: Donâ€™t Commit Sodomy!

By sodomy he means don’t have anal sex. Â I don’t see why I should stop with the Love Llama – we have such a good time. Â I’m not committing anything. Â I’m sharing.

Â We all seem to forget, in the dense propaganda haze of American popular opinion, that homosexuality is defined by voluntary sexual acts.

Yes, if it wasn’t voluntary on both parts we’d call it rape you dickwad. All sexual acts are voluntary, it’s really not a big deal. Â However, for ways of expressing and sharing my love I voluntarily partake in sex acts with my Love Llama who just happens to be of the same-sex. Â We love it. Â Why should we stop?

Homosexuals are no more compelled to commit sodomy with each other than a married man is compelled to cheat on his wife.

Sexual relief is a natural bodily function. Â I seek out said relief in many ways. Â Nobody is ‘compelled’ to have sex at all. Â We do it because it feels good. Â Lively is not being asked to partake in something that he doesn’t like, nor are the people of Uganda.

While Lively is rolling around in his own little smug part of the world happy to endorse a bill that will cause great harm to his fellow humans, meanwhile, that other big religious homophobe in Rome has been busy too.

It seems that Pope Bendydick has blessed the speaker of the Uganda Parliamentt. Â This is the same Ugandan who promised to pass the kill the gays bill as a christmas present for the people. Â How charming. Â Now the locking up of gay people is seen as a gift.

We can only see that as tactic approval by Bendydick that theÂ UgandansÂ have it right in the eyes of the catholics. Â Kill all the gays!

She handed over to the Pope a portrait of the Uganda Martyrs Shrine Namugongo, a historical place where Christians were murdered because of their allegiance to their faith.

Let me get this right… In Uganda people have been killed because they were christian. Â Faith is something that can be changed, easily. Â And yet, somehow, it’s ok to kill gay people because of who they are. Â Will there be a shrine for those people?

Sexy T-Shirt Bought by the ACL’s Wendy Francis

Bruce — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 12:40:29 +0000

[SOURCE]

Oh no! Â In Brisbane they are selling t-shirts for babies! Â The ACL are beside themselves! Â They must stop it at once!

Highly sexualised advertising and marketing has reached the stage where T-shirts such as this (pictured left) are sold in family shopping centres. Â This range of T-shirts were being sold in the Logan Hyperdome, a large shopping centre in Logan just South of Brisbane.

This is your version of highly sexualised? Â A t-shirt with sexy in red letters?

ACLâ€™s Qld State Director, Wendy Francis, requested the shop keeper of ZINOS to remove them from sale but was told they were â€˜meant to be funnyâ€™. These T-shirts are in size 0 â€“ for babies.

Size 0 – so made for babies under 1 year old. Â I can see how the child would feel sexualised with the word sexyÂ emblazonedÂ across their chest.

Wendy bought a T-shirt and took it to Centre Management, making an official complaint.

Seriously? Â You bought one of the shirts? Â I hope you get a refund, I’m sure it will be too small. Â God must be so pleased.

She also stood outside of ZINOS for some time and asked other shoppers whether they believed it was an appropriate shirt for a baby â€“ not one person believed it was.

For how long? Â 1 hour? Â 4? Â How many people did she ask? Â How many just walked past her as if she was mad? Â How many just ignored her?

Later that day I survey 100 babies in prams, aged 0 – 1 year about the t-shirts. Â 100% of those surveyed said ‘goo’. Â God must be so pleased she has so much time to spare.

Later that day she received the following correspondence from Centre Management confirming the shirts would be removed.

I would have to Centre Management to fuck off.

Good Afternoon Ms Francis,

Thank you for coming to see us this afternoon regarding the baby t-shirt that you found to be offensive.Â Feedback such as yours helps us provide a more pleasurable shopping experience at the Hyperdome.Â I have spoken with the owner of the business and he is removing it from sale today. I trust that you are happy with this immediate action.Â Once again thank you for your feedback, and we look forward to welcoming you back to Hyperdome.

Ho-hum, must be another christian.

Whilst glad for a good result in this instance, this is a miniscule win in the overall huge problem.

So a funny t-shirt must be taken off the shelf because some sexy grandmother doesn’t like the design? Â How quaint. Â (I don’t think she’s sexy, but she’s not doing her hair that way and wearing thatÂ jewelleryÂ to look un-sexy)

Childhood should be a time of innocence, learning and fun.

The shirts are size 0 – how much reading is the kid doing? Â How much reading are the child’s peers doing? Â And if they did see the word sexy what would it mean?

Children should not be pressured by inappropriate sexualised marketing and advertising.

An under one year old is being pressured by inappropriate marketing? Â Things are really quiet now the gays have been told to shut up.

Dr Amanda Gordon, former President of the Australian Psychological Society says: â€œIf the message is that you should be sexy and grown-up, instead of being a kid, then kids arenâ€™t practising and learning how to be whole human beings that will actually make them into great adults.â€

Â You do know that lots of young people thrive to be sexy so that they can have sex. Â You know, attract a partner to have some jiggy-jiggy with. Â That’s how we learn to grow to be a whole human being. Â Not by pretending that the word sexy is the end of the world and about to bring about the destruction of alpacas and christians the world over.

I’m too sexy for my skin.

Miriam Grossman talks about giving head

Bruce — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 23:48:04 +0000

Australia waits for Miriam Grossman to land on our shores to spread her god virus amongst us.

She talks about oral sex and throat cancer while in New Zealand doing the rounds. Â She’s making big claims that nobody tells anyone the risk of the Â human papilloma virus, which may be spread through sexual contact. Â The HPV has a vaccine, unlike religion.

You can see her on New Zealand’s Close Up hereÂ where she’s keen to spread the word that sex is evil and should only be had when you’re married.

Grossman is keen to talk about oral sex, which she clearly thinks is a bad idea because it may give you throat cancer. Â She could probably do with a bit of oral sex, it would probably cheer her up a bit. Â Sucking dick does have it’s risks, as does any sex if you have multiple partners. Â The idea isn’t to tell kids not to do it, because that won’t stop them, the idea is to tell kids that there are risks and what those risks are, and more importantly how to protect themselves. Â Grossman says that the medical evidence isn’t being taught to kids, and yet, in looking at some of the website she accuses of having misinformation it seems pretty clear that in fact the information is there and being taught. Â Grossman mentions oral sex because it has shock value. Â Alas, as we all know, oral sex is not anything to do with sexual relationships – just ask Bill.

Checking in on the Facebook page for Close Up it’s clear that her brand of sex education isn’t welcome in New Zealand. Â Here’s a sample of comments:

What a load of crap. What is that woman doing over here in New Zealand?Â When we lived in the US, 7 years ago, our 2 teenage daughters were in Middle School, aged 13 and 14.Â Out of the 25 students, more then half of the girls were pregnant. Â Before telling someone else what to do, she should clean up her own back yard.

Bad choice putting an American prude on, not a good representation of discussion in NZ

Get the foreigner off! Fix your own country before you trample around in our backyard!!!

I think Dr Grossman needs to get a life

Clearly this lady spent more time in the library than she did sucking d!#K.

omfg the AMERICAN SO IGNORANT SO IGNORANT. I DON’T EVEN NEEED TO SAY ANYMORE.Â teenagers are going to have sex whenever the hell they please, they need to be educated on how to be safe about it or we’ll just get more stds and preganancys.

There are of course comments that go the other way, you can check those out too.

Grossman is in New Zealand to attend the Family First Forum – seems that Family First is a lobby group in New Zealand that is your typical fundamental christian fuckwits that think nobody but married people should have children. Â Sort of like a NZ version of the ACL. Â I’m sure there are tickets still available, I don’t think it’d be a sell out. Â I hear some of our very own ACL members are heading over for the wank-fest.

Does anyone know if NZ’s Maccas have free wi fi? Do they have the internet there?

— Lyle Shelton (@LyleShelton) June 25, 2012

Grossman will be in Australia for her Sunday chat with the locals at the Glen Eira College, be sure to check in with Mike StuchberyÂ he has asked the question about why a state school is hosting such an event.

See, I think that a state school performing arts centre â€“ ostensibly a school hall â€“ is the least appropriate place to host a speaker who would be there to marginalize and abuse young gay men and women, telling them that there is something wrong with them and they can be â€˜fixedâ€™.

He asks good questions. Â I’m aware that several people have written to the school asking for some clarification. Â It would seem that the school can’t find the reply button on their email program.

You can also check out Ideologically Impure, there’s a promise of an in-depth blog to come, that should be fun!

On the other side, there’s a blog called Leeds which sounds remarkably like a variety of onion, Leeds thanks me for bringing this talk to its attention and is keen to get along. Â I’m not sure who the Leeds is, but according to its friend:

failures as an educator and writer as well as a person and a role model

Leeds says this:

For the very very reasons that they try to howl her down and people like her, who obviously talk commonsense and have done their research, I want to hear what she has to say and it sounds as though her book may be an interesting and good read.

When you base your sexuality and education on texts that were written well over 2000 years ago, you are not applying common sense. Â Like all religious types there is no common sense to any of this. Â The starting point is, this is what the bible says, therefore everything I do will be based on that.

That’s crazy.

Free speech is fine, however, if you put yourself out in the public and base your talk onÂ pseudoÂ science and make-believe, expect people to exercise their free speech right against your insanity.

Grossman and Sex

Bruce — Sun, 24 Jun 2012 03:54:17 +0000

On July 1st 2012 the Australian Family Association will host a public address by Miriam Grossman titled Sex Education â€“ Protecting Our Childrenâ€™s Health. Â The talk has been advertised in the Australian Jewish News.

Just so we know who we’re talking about here, the AFA is a right-wing group who think that marriage can only be between a man and a woman. Â It has the likes of Margaret Court as patron, and other ratbags including Shimon Cowen¹

Shimon Cowen is chairing the meeting. Â Cowen earlier this year was widely criticised for his ‘paper‘ on homosexuality and bullying. Â His paper included this:

Â From a religious standpoint, if a person felt an overwhelming homosexual impulse of the deepest nature, that would be viewed with compassion but it would not constitute permission to indulge homosexual activity in practice. It is an abnormality, which as far as possible should be treated.

Miriam Gross is an AmericanÂ child and adolescent psychiatrist. Â She’s an ultra-orthodox JewÂ which no doubt has a huge impact on her profession and herÂ ideology. Â No doubt she’s an expert in her field. Â She does seem to be very keen on telling young people not to have sex. Â One of the things she says is that she treats lots of people for problems with having sex early in their lives. I’m not at all surprised that someone who offers counselling for adolescent children will see children with a wide range of problems, including sexual matters.

Miriam is going to give a public lecture, and just to make sure we’re paying attention she’s giving the talk in a state secondary school,Â Glen Eira College. Â That’s done as a way of adding some sort of credibility to the talk. Â The school community will know it’s on and they have plenty of victims to pick from. Â One of the major concerns you have as a parent is sex and what your kids are doing. Â It’s really easy for someone like the AFA to play on those concerns and make it look like they care.

The title of the talk is Sex Education Protecting our Children’s Well-being (that’s the title in the press ads). That says all the right things! Â What parent doesn’t want to protect their child’s well-being?

Grossman’s attitude towards sex education is very traditional and conservative. Â Her attitude no doubt is that children should never be told anything about sex, because they might go out and try it.

The AFA website says this:

She will provide you with critical health information and facts about sex that you can share with your teenagers. It is sound medical advice you will not have heard elsewhere.

Grossman also champions an online petition that says

We declare that sex education programs should encourage the ideal of delaying sexual activity until marriage as the only sure way to avoid sexually transmitted diseases, out-of-wedlock pregnancies, abortions, and a myriad of the other well-documented negative health consequences associated with premarital sex.

A clear indication that she thinks sex should not happen outside traditional marriage, ignoring the fact that very few people actually wait until they are married to have sex. Â Her approach is one of fear tactics and guilt.

Grossman also thinks homosexuality is wrong. Â Earlier this year she put her name to a letter in supportÂ for Lesley Pilkington, a psychotherapistÂ involved in among other things, unwanted homosexuality and therapy. Â In the letter that she supports is this paragraph:

Psychological care for those who are distressed by unwanted homosexual attractions has been shown to yield a range of beneficial client outcomes, especially in motivated clients. This is supported by recent empirical evidence from Byrd, Nicolosi, Shaeffer, Spitzer, Jones and Yarhouse. Such therapy does not produce harm despite the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) and others maintaining the contrary. In this area, the RCPsych seems to be guided by the Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Mental Health Special Interest Group, and could therefore be partial to one view

I’ve already blogged onthe work of Spitzer, and he has since recanted his research.

One of Grossman’s books is called “You’re Teaching My Child What?”. That’s a really good question, and one that should be asked of Grossman.

Her idea of sex education is abstinence. No sex outside marriage. Â Her idea is that children should not be told about homosexuality, transsexualityÂ or bisexuality. Â Children should not be encouraged to explore their bodies and understand how they work. Â Her talks are about instilling fear into children, that the best way to avoid any sexually transmitted disease is by not having sex with anyone but your married partner.

Her attitude is mostÂ definitelyÂ driven by religious dogma by both the christian and jewish traditions.

It has no place in modern Australia.

The school should deny her access to their premises and anyone promoting this talk should be told more precisely just what it’s about.

Grossman will peddle hatred and mistrust to unsuspecting parents.

Â See Mikeybears many blogs about that arsehole here ↩

sex – Bruce Llama

Bill does Balcony Sex

Related Posts

Are you a Virgin?

Related Posts

Grossman asks the questions

Related Posts

How to use tragedy to push your religion – Ray Comfort gets it wrong!

Related Posts

Another Crazy Catholic is Smug

Related Posts

Cameron Spink on Sex

Related Posts

Lively wants to Kill the Gays and the Pope Approves

Related Posts

Sexy T-Shirt Bought by the ACL’s Wendy Francis

Related Posts

Miriam Grossman talks about giving head

Related Posts

Grossman and Sex

Related Posts