if your going to use root words as an argument

@Deleted User cuddle okay

yay!

So bassicly sex-havers are bad

Basically, what I'm saying is, homosexuality is fine in the context of platonic relationships, but when homosexuality becomes widely accepted, if often stops being platonic. In a civilization where equality is the standard, where differences are not linked, where promiscuity is in favour, in a splintered and materialistic society, the phenomenon of regression and homosexuality are particularly welcome, and therefore it is in no way a surprise to see the alarming increase in homosexuality in the democratic period. @Deleted User

I don't get it.

That would count as part of the joke

What joke?

LMAO

@Deleted User have you ever been in a homosexual relationship

Yes

how many?

One guy. It has literally been my only serious relationship.

ah

is that the main baises for your argument?

No, I base my arguments on metaphysics, philosophy and general observation of ancient societies where homosexuality was widely accepted. If you read the last pages of the Symposium and the speech of Alcibiades, you realize how little the eros of homosexuality remained “Platonic” in Hellas and how it also led increasingly to carnal developments as the ancient customs in Greece and Rome declined.

Ur basically bending over and asking the text walls to come

All I can do is suggest you read Eros and the Mysteries of Love: The Metaphysics of Sex, by Julius Evola.

uh hu

i think your partially right

legitimately

homosexual relationships have the potential to just platonic sex

its happened to me its happened to people i know

but i've also had heterosexual relationships turn into that

"Platonic sex" is an oxymoron.

and i've seen homosexuals have long love filled relationships

depends on the context of platonic

if i'm talking platonic in the sexual sense obviously, but i clearly mean it in the emotional sense

Platonic love is a romantic relationship that is non-sexual.

it has multiple definitions either way you understand the point i was making

i could've gone with emotionless carnal acts but i didnt feel like typing that out

i think homosexual male relationships have a large potential to become totally sexual

but its not a rule

or a guarantee

I'm saying that with genuine platonic love, the beautiful or lovely other person inspires the mind and the soul and directs one's attention to spiritual things. Vulgar Eros is nothing but mere material attraction towards a beautiful body for physical pleasure and reproduction whilst Divine Eros begins the journey from physical attraction but transcends gradually to love for Supreme Beauty. Many homosexual relationships could be described as Divine Eros, however, in a society where homosexuality becomes accepted as a norm, it gradually becomes Vulgar Eros, materialistic and hedonistic.

Why are you presenting it as a dichotome thougj

>implying that hasnt been slowly happening to heterosexuals over the past millennium
>implying its inevitable

It is possible to have a relationship where sex is present, that isnt purely materialistic or fueled by lust

You can see this in Greece and Rome, as these societies began to decline in greatness. Richard Spencer is partially right when he says homosexuality was always part of European culture, but that dosen't mean it should be celebrated or widely accepted.

@Deleted User It has been happening to heterosexuals, I'm not arguing otherwise.