Reminder

Or heterosexual sex, if you're homosexual.

Why the fuck are you so intent on codifying human behavior into distinct classifications? As if "gay" is a genetic disease you either have or don't have.

If you paired that kind of thinking with literally ANY other human behavior, you'd sound insane.

"That guy got on a boat. He's not a land dweller, that's just some dirty sailor in disguise"

"That guy isn't a vegetarian, he tried meat in college. He had a carnivore experience. He's just a carnivore who eats vegetables now."

And why the sudden vitriol toward Bisexuality? What is the truth that we're all so fopishly pussyfooting around, oh Guardian of the One True Way?

Christ you're up your own ass.

Attached: 1379881011033.jpg (563x598, 66K)

Those are rookie numbers. We've gotta pump those numbers up.

It's due to retardation.

>And why the sudden vitriol toward Bisexuality?
He's based and redpilled in that, tho.

That applies to bisexual women and lesbians too.

Based.

Interesting

Praise God. Die mentally ill. Cease slinging your seed in the gene pool.

Most bisexual people breed, I think.

>I don't like x and my fairy sky guy said that x is wrong reeeeeeeee
>look at x they just keep killing themselves for no reason clearly we were right all along
I can't believe half the country is literally this fucking stupid AT LEAST. Holy fuck we never stood a chance in the grand scheme of things.

A quick reminder that bisexual women are the most accepted LGBT group.

That's like saying y was the least shot at during the invasion of Normandy. So fucking what?

Bisexual male here. Good looking and very hung. Why would I kill myself when girl pussy and boypussy are always a click away on dating apps.

Life is great.

They think about killing themselves more than any other LGB group. Maybe the lack of acceptance is not the problem, but the fact that bisexuality is a mental illness.

Let me get this straight. You think because the number is higher in a group that is accepted the most in the sample (see Normandy reference) that lack of acceptance s NOT A problem, period? That's fucking retarded. Just because there is less sugar a diet soda doesn't mean sugar is now not a health problem. What the fuck kind of shit is that?

>that lack of acceptance s NOT A problem, period?
Not in bisexual women at least.

That, or that PLUS other shit? Why are you eliminating a variable just because it happens less to people who kill themselves the most? That's illogical and also retarded.

Which are the other variables?

I don't give a fuck. I am calling out shit logic. Stop doing shit logic in order to win some retarded ass argument on the internet.

LGBT people always says that if they had more acceptance they would be happier. Bisexual women are the living proof that is not true. Bisexuality is a self-destructive mental illness.

Since gay people generally don't contribute much to the gene pool (two of the same makes no babies) but the number of gay people seems to remain roughly the same one can assume that genetics play no part on determining sexuality.

Yes, that's retarded. Stop doing that.

*ahem* Molestation *ahem*.

Pick a side.

I have a side. That argument is retarded, stop making that argument.

While being molested as a child does play a part in how a person develops their sexuality it is far from the only thing that does. And since not everyone who was molested is bi or gay and not everyone who is bi or gay was molested I doubt it plays as much of a part as you might think it does.

>hrc.org/blog/seven-things-you-didnt-know-about-bisexual-health
No sources given, when clicking on the Bisexual Resource Center link it gives a 404

>uptodate.com/contents/suicidal-ideation-and-behavior-in-adults
They list a source for the claim that bisexuals are more likely to have suicide ideations and in the first glance looks good (meta study over 46 different studies and a good methodology).
Lets look at it
>Random-effects meta-analysis comparing bisexual individuals with lesbian/gay individuals yielded odds ratios (ORs) ranging between 1.22-1.52 across the four outcomes examined.
Basically meaning that bisexuals are 1.22-1.52 more likely to have suicidal ideations than homosexuals.
You therby conclude
>This is not the only thing that proof bisexuality is not a healthy sexuality
Let's see what the authors of the meta study suggests as a reason:
>Within-sexual minority differences in suicide risk may be attributed to structural and interpersonal experiences of monosexism, bisexual erasure and invisibility, or lack of bisexual-affirming social support, each of which may be experienced differently across gender/sex identities.

>academic.oup.com/cid/article/53/suppl_3/S84/312345
Not adjusted for number of sexual partners -> these numbers tell you absolutely nothing.
>poz.com/article/bisexual-STIs-25837-6322
Let me Quote
>Some factors that affect their sexual health include unprotected sex, early sexual debut, forced sexual encounters, increased numbers of sexual partners, substance use, exchange sex, risk behaviors of their male and female partners, and pregnancy-related considerations. These factors uniquely shape MSMW’s vulnerability to HIV/STIs and other sexual health problems.

TBH. Im not surprised that people who have sex with men and women have more sex in general (i.e. with more different partners) and therefore more STD's. You don't need to be a wizzard to come up with this.

Sounds like it's difficult to be gay in our society. Maybe we should make it less difficult.

>when clicking on the Bisexual Resource Center link it gives a 404
Internet Archive, you colossal faggot.
web.archive.org/web/20160311191434/http://www.hrc.org/blog/bisexual-health-awareness-month-bi-the-way-our-health-matters-too

Why?

It would be interesting to see what these figures look like on a more localized area. How does depression rates in homosexuals compare between those living in San Fransisco and those living in rural Alabama for example? Because maybe it's not actually the sexuality that is the determining factor?

Bisexuality, like gender nonconforming people, subvert a binary system. Lots of people see the subversion of that system to be dangerous. That it upsets current cultural power dynamics.

So they'll look for any reason to demonize those groups. Then when those groups display a propensity for depression due to that demonization, they use that fact to further demonize them.

Attached: IMG_20190828_205448.jpg (750x732, 92K)

I'm more inclined to believe external stimuli lead to mental health issues within a large cohort than jumping to some sort of inherent cognitive issue.

As quoted above the studies speculated the same. That it was a lack of acceptance and services that led to these negative emotional states.

epic fortnite moment yall

Attached: 1565649749450.jpg (1091x970, 294K)

What does society wins by enabling confused hedonists that spread STDs to every demographic?

>Internet Archive, you colossal faggot.
Im sorry, but if the hrc takes it off their site, it's usually something you should not rely on. It's like the antivaxxers bringing up the study about autism, which reads RETRACTED in capital letters written all over it

But let's take a look at it anyway. No source given just the data.
>Some of the startling research we shared at that meeting included:
To me this sounds like a teaser to a study that is currently conducted. But as this article got deleted, to me it seems like the typical pop science journalism, where the authors can't wait for having reliable facts, bring out an article, just to later delete it as it turns out to be wrong/misinterpreted data...

No matter what the case is, without a reliable source, this data is worth nothing (and the 10 minutes I looked at it would be better spend masturbating to midget porn)

>What does society win by...
Those who are not heterosexual will be able to live happier, more fulfilled lives which in turn makes them more likely to contribute to the advancement of humanity as a whole.
What does society lose by allowing same sex relationships?

It's called a condom. STDs aren't even a big deal. Just wear a rubber. Not like you have to worry anyway. Not like you're getting any.

>What does society lose by allowing same sex relationships?
It makes some people uncomfortable/disgusts many normal people

Because in order to legislate against gay people you need an oppressive military state and I don't want to give the fucking government power to invade my home on a whim to find out who I'm fucking.

You can still contract and/or spread herpes with a condom on.

>What does society lose by allowing same sex relationships?
I never said that we should not enable same sex relationships. I just criticized the confused hedonists.

Except that it seems to be that bisexual people are too retarded to use one.

I think you replied to the wrong post.

Stay mad and go back to /tttt/. Your intelligence is so small that you have to choose a side lol. Ill just enjoy sexy people in general while you have only one flavor.
Besides, most people are bisexual anyway, they just need the right circumstance.

Who cares. Don't fuck people then. It's safe to assume anyone could have an STD regardless of sexuality. Protect yourself by knowing your partner and practicing safe sex.

It's not rocket science you retard

Not sure what you're responding to since we seem to have the same opinion on this. And yes, trying to enforce sexuality by law would require an invasion of personal privacy on an unimaginable level in order to be effective.

This is changing through, homosexuality and bisexuality is far more accepted among the younger generations and in time the bigotry of old will fade, like many other antiquated ways of thinking has.

Get rid of the riff raff... let them sort themselves out

>you have only one flavor.
I didn't picked the multiple STDs flavor.

...

Good to know