64 Replies to “Biden’s America Building Back Gay”

  1. It does not really matter if millennials are confused about sexuality as they are not having much sex anyway. The most pathetic generation in history.

  3. Why should millennials being confused about which way they swing be astonishing? Don’t we have a prime minister who’s like that? If he likes groping the ladies, why is he prancing like a ponce in them thar “pride” parades?

  5. So then … 33% of Millennials have taken a vow of poverty? Because the #1 predictor of wealth is an intact, two-parent, male and female family. Go ahead and “invent your own sexuality”. I’m all in favor of personal liberty and choice. But please be prepared to OWN your choice.

    Don’t talk to me about my “privilege” … it was a “choice” … a “natural” choice. I went with nature. I went with God. Don’t call me a homophobe. I’m nothing of the sort. But 33% of millennials are definitely heterophobes.

    1. Gays also went with nature. Sexuality is not and has never been a choice, demented imaginings of the ‘god’ crowd notwithstanding.

        1. Especially if you’ve been molested, or groomed, or are just plain mentally ill.

        2. “Sexuality is too complex to be determined solely by biology.”

          Yes. Gender, however, is not.

          You are born either A) male or B) female…or in 0.0012% of cases (that’s 1 in 83,000) possibly both.

          Everything else is a woke, progressive or PC fantasy, sorry.

      4. And The Genome Project? They discovered that Gay Gene yet? Get back to me when SCIENCE proves being Gay is biological and utterly beyond human control. Get back to me with biochemical signature of “the Gay gene” … I’m still waiting.

        1. “And The Genome Project? They discovered that Gay Gene yet? Get back to me when SCIENCE proves being Gay is biological and utterly beyond human control. Get back to me with biochemical signature of “the Gay gene” … I’m still waiting.”

          I suspect that they actually DID discover it years ago, but quickly realized how disastrous that discovery would be for the LGBT crowd. Imagine a doctor telling a pregnant woman that her son or daughter would likely be born homsexual, before asking her if she wanted them to ‘correct’ that flaw with a little gene therapy…

      5. “Gays also went with nature. Sexuality is not and has never been a choice,”

        True. Homosexuality, to nature, is a genetic defect…and nature’s response is to control and mitigate the effects of that defect by preventing the afflicted individuals from breeding and passing along the defective gene. It is never completely eliminated, but it is kept in check.

    2. Building Back Buttigieg.
      I’m certain that somewhere in the “Infrastructure Bill” there is legislation that facilitates renting a uterus; a process which is so stressful that Mayor Pete needed months of uterine recovery leave.

  6. Most of them (mills) will identify with or believe anything if they think it is trendy.

  7. I know a young guy who thinks he’s gay. He’s just fat and stupid – kryptonite to women. I suspect the epidemic of obesity relates directly to the epidemic of queerness. All those lesbian looking women have a beam 2 axe handles wide.

    1. This one is very easy to figure out. Does he masturbate to gay porn or to straight porn?

  8. This reminds of the old Man Show gag.
    Q: How do you tell if your wife is a lesbian?
    A: Look at her tongue, if it is another woman’s vagina she is a lesbian.

      2. Oh come on sweetie, we know what happened while you were absent. “UnMe” indeed, dear!

  12. In other gay news, National Post reports that Blackie The Gay Pirate will be burning jet fuel next week to Washington.

  17. Didn’t they tell us that their campaign could not possibly “convert” people? Then how did we go from less than 10% to about 30% in less than a generation?

    Of course, the answer is that the millennials were… how should I put this…”Influenced” by the culture around them. Unfortunately, we were right all along, but we were told we were all a bunch of fear-mongering, homophobic, conspiracy theorists.

    It also shows that we were right about the possibility to change your sexual preference, and that you really weren’t “born that way.”

    You can lock me up or cancel me at any time for my remarks. I’ve been canceled already… many times over so I really don’t care anymore, but know this. Society will pay for their arrogance one day.

    1. “It also shows that we were right about the possibility to change your sexual preference, and that you really weren’t “born that way.””

      No it doesn’t. It just demonstrates that 1) mills are stupid and/or 2) this study is bunkum

      The Gallup poll mentioned at the end of the story is more reliable, and when parsed makes clear that the increase in LGBT identification it supposedly detects is just young women being more open about likely transient bisexuality. To be clear: no one is converted to or from gayness. Those thinking otherwise are usually trapped in the closet.

      1. Lol. “Anyone who disagrees with me must be a homosexual!” Great argument. Certainly in line with your usual fact-free, reality-denying, irrational, idiotic, Twitter-approved, Big-Tech-verified head-in-the-sand blinkered bullshit drivel.

      3. “Bunkum”! My word old chap. Bloody marvellous resurrection of a disused word there old cock!

        Good old Omar the transgender terrorist, I missed you.

        But I won’t next time. 😉

      4. So let me see if I understand you correctly. Are you suggesting that homosexuals among the general population is not 30%.

        What is it then? Is it lower? or higher? Because I can tell you from people that I have talked to that gays believed that they number in the 25% to 30% range… and that was about 15 or 20 years ago, and yes, it is hearsay, so please don’t ask me to produce any sources.

        So are you suggesting that the people suggesting that ratio were wrong? That would be much unlike you, unme.

        What isn’t unlike you is suggesting that I am gay for presenting the argument. I can assure you that you are way off the mark.

  18. The US of A is finished. Its military is a joke, a really bad joke. Except it has nukes. Just like Pakistan, another failed state, except Pakistan doesn’t glorify pederasts and sodomites. On the contrary.

  19. Man conservaderps are still really triggered by successful gay people getting recognition. BTW that Patriot Post was like a parody of terrible right wing ‘news’ sites. Beyond parody. 2 cups of whinging butthurt in 1 cup of bad website design

    1. Successful = worked closely with “Reverend” Jim Jones and eventually took a bullet to the head. Keep drinking the Kool Aid, loser!

    2. Facepalm. What do you know about USN history and historical ship naming rules? Nothing, as usual.

    3. “conservaderp”
      “triggered”
      “butthurt”

      UnMe is about 16 years old. Still doesn’t generate enough pity to stop me from (redacted), but just saying.

  21. What, not a submarine? I guess then they’d have to deal with the question of whether it’s circumcised or uncut. But then the Homo Mafia would bicker endlessly about the vessel’s length.

    1. Please don’t give them any ideas. It is enough that Jimmy Carter got a sub named after him. The entire USN naming convention got screwed so many times that it makes no sense anymore. USN has no Saratoga, Hornet or Lexington, Yorktown is a cruiser waiting to be scrapped, Wasp is an amhib ship and the next Enterprise will take a decade before she is commissioned. Admirals who had destroyers names are now getting carriers, subs get cruiser names, cruisers get carrier names etc. The only change that made sense was giving boomers battleship names. But of course attack subs then got state names too because reasons….

      1. It is enough that Jimmy Carter got a sub named after him.

        In Carter’s case, it was legitimate. He served on board nuclear subs and was picked for that job by Admiral Hyman Rickover himself.

        1. That does not mean he deserved to have sub named after him. Subs were traditionally named after fish or marine mammals. Then attack subs got city names (old cruiser names while cruisers got carrier names, mostly) and boomers got state names (old battleship names). Except for the Seawolf Class attack subs where the lead ship name was an old sub name in agreement with a former convention, Connecticut got an old battleship name or a new boomer name, and Jimmy Carter got a president’s name because fuck logic and tradition.
          If Carter has been a naval hero, or something close to it, then a frigate or destroyer could carry his name.

          1. The only thing that should have carried Carter’s name was an old, rusting tanker used for target practice.

          2. Aren’t aircraft carriers currently named after presidents? Guess some day we’ll see one named the USS Turnip.

          3. Subs were traditionally named after fish or marine mammals.

            Not always. For example, USS George Washington SSBN-598, USS Patrick Henry, SSBN-599, USS Thomas Jefferson SSBN-618, USS John Adams SSBN-620, and USS James Madison SSBN-627. (Note that all of those are boomers.)

            Then there are a number of subs named after geographical locations, such as USS Alabama SSBN-731 and USS Ohio SSBN-726/SSGN-726. (The latter was originally a boomer but was re-configured to carry and launch cruise missiles.)

            I’m sure there may be information in references such as Jane’s Fighting Ships.

          4. “Aren’t aircraft carriers currently named after presidents?….”

            Kinda. Currently in service:
            Nimitz: named after an admiral, historically that name would go on a destroyer, name never used in the past.
            Eisenhower: after WWII commander and president, name never used in the past.
            Carl Vinson: after a friendly to navy politician, name never used in the past.
            Theodore Roosevelt, previously a sub (boomer)
            Abraham Lincoln: previously a sub (boomer).
            George Washington: previously a sub (boomer)
            John C. Stennis: named after a politician, name never used in the past.
            Harry S. Truman, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Gerald R. Ford all new names after presidents.
            Upcoming:
            John F. Kennedy: second ship named after him, the same stupid idea repeated twice.
            Enterprise: fucking finally.
            Doris Miller: named after war hero, previous Miller was a frigate but since Miller was black he now gets a carrier.

            So good names with historical significance for the navy: Enterprise.
            Bad name used on a CV in a past: JFK
            Names used in the past but not on CVs: Roosevelt, Washington, Lincoln, Miller
            The rest are bullshit.
            Names absent that belong on CVs: Langley, Saratoga, Lexington, Ranger, Yorktown, Hornet, Wasp, Independence, Essex to name the most obvious candidates.
            I bet if you asked Chester Nimitz himself whether a CV should be named after him or the Navy should receive a Saratoga he wuld choose the later in a heartbeat.

          5. “Not always. For example, USS George Washington SSBN-598, …”

            Yes, early boomers, which was a new class of ships all together were initially named after presidents and then after historical figures. Those were the classes from George Washington to Benjamin Franklin. Then Boomers received old battleship (i.e. state) names: the Ohio class and the upcoming Columbia class. This made sense, as battleships become relics of the past, the sacred names would be a carried by new class of “capital” ships.

            With attack subs the things were dumber. Prior to Los Angeles class these had traditional sub names, LA class carries old cruiser (i.e. city) names, after LAs came the Seawolf (incoherent naming), and then Virginias, these in turn, mostly carry old battleship (i.e. state) names, but some are named after admirals. Go back to traditional sub names USN, you have plenty of choices there!

          6. “Guess some day we’ll see one named the USS Turnip.”

            Imagine serving on USS BJ Clinton or USS Hussein Ogabe Al-Chicago or USS Farty Pants.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation