gatomontes99

The studies you posted aren't empirical. In fact, the first study admitted it was flawed. It actually said that they likely misappropriated the cause of erections. The second link was a paper, not a study and that paper stated most of those that they categorized as homophobic, identified as straight. Considering your thesis is that all homophobes are actually gay, you've done a shit job of supporting that thesis. Along the way, the point you tried to counter (that you are a hypocrite) has been reinforced by your own writings.

Irony defined.

You'd rather get the editor's biased opinion than the information straight from the source? The Homan X post is what Homan thinks. In a thread about Homan, it seemed appropriate.

Your quote is earlier in the article and discusses how other papers came to that conclusion. You pulled your quote from the Abstract. I pulled mine from the Conclusion.

Maybe this is why DUI decided to post such a childish attack.

Actually, that is your source quoting another paper. Your source came to the conclusion: "First, homophobia was associated with increased odds of straight identification in all groups." Your source says homophobia is associated with identifying as heterosexual. As a man that identifies as a woman and demands everyone else believe that, how can you claim that homophobic people that identify as straight are anything other than straight? Unless....you are a hypocrite?

Is this better? Would this person do a better job of protecting us... ...from this... ...or maybe this guy... ...can protect us from... from these guys. ⬆️ I think I will take the guy that can cite law, off the top of his head, over the DEI hires that are more concerned about pronouns than results. And so will the majority of Americans. That's why they voted, overwhelmingly, for DJT.

Except the papers you published literally said the opposite.

Is your argument that his cabinet and appointees act against his will?

KSM, who killed thousands of women and children, both in America and abroad, will live: There you go. What the fùck is wrong with Joe? Well, we know it isn't Joe. It's his handlers, but you know what I mean.

30 years? Try 1000 years. @robosmith, answer two questions if you will: What temperature has the Earth spent most of its existent at? What is the current temp?

Probably too soon for jokes.

The Tesla guy was a bomb expert. He managed to pull up, shoot himself and detonate a bomb in 17 seconds. And he decided to have his military ID and Passport with him. It's all very strange.

Ok Skippy. You keep believing that. But let's recap: I made fun of your hypocrisy You tried to call me homophobic, I debunked your article You called me names. I called you out on it. You tried to use the same debunked article. I pointed out your article was already debunked. You tried a new article I debunked that. What do you think will happen next? You can't support your opinion. And your opinion is based on a false assumption that I am homophobic. I am not. I made fun of you for being a hypocrite. And none of this has to do with a general giving an enemy aid and comfort...aka treason.

No. The article that came from was cited in this article and that article cited the study you cited. It's all one big circle jerk. The irony here is that you are the one that is insecure in who you are, not me.

From you source: "First, homophobia was associated with increased odds of straight identification in all groups." You should read your sources.

Well, A: I get to be pissed because my team lost. B: You should be pissed because Joe Joe the dumbass is trying to cause inflation during Trump's term with last second, scorched earth political b.s.

You are really grasping at straws. I didn't clumsily deny anything. I quoted YOUR SOURCE. That source is over 30 years old. There is no study that claims to prove homophobia is associated with latent homesexual desire. Not your study and no study since. Let's face it. You got pwned and you tried to respond but you just dug a deeper and deeper whole. My comment was about YOU being a HYPOCRITE. Because you were. Maybe don't throw shade when you are standing in the darkness.

It was THE AUTHORS OF THE STUDY THAT YOU QUOTED SAYING THE STUDY WAS IN INCLUSIVE. So your retort to you have no substance and can't respond with anything other than personal attacks, is to respond with no substance and make more personal attacks? Prove me right much?

I posted an article that completely refuted your homophobic study (including quotes from your study that refuted your study) and all you did was cut the stuff that refuted your baseless assertion and make personal attacks on me. Now you try to say I lack emotional maturity, while you behave like an child.

Isn't it wonderful that Joe is doing everything he can to make our lives harder?

No. I'm saying you are a hypocrit relying on cheap, childish retorts rather than substantive discussion.

Nope. Joe was never really President.

Kind of like the guy that pretends to be a girl making fun of the guy that dresses up and pretends to be someone else for fun? You literally did that same thing twice.

Did you see how you precious paper admits it is flawed?