Thursday, October 9, 2014


 By Silvio

1. Revoltingness- capacity to elicit revulsion 
2. A-lister Gays- gays who can't stomach sex with other gays
3. Simpletonite Gays (formerly Kevlarite Gays- gays who can eat anything as if they have Kevlar stomachs; formerly B-lister Gays, for their low-class taste in sex )
4. Charlatans- read all the post with "Treating" in their title 
5. Charlatanic- pertaining to Charlatans 
6. Therapeutic Homophobia- sexual conversion modality based on the natural revoltingness of homosexuals.

Nope, we are not yet done with the blog. My apologies for the rather long hiatus. We are still discussing the treatment of Homosexual Disease through the manipulation of the prevalent revulsion to homosexuals even among homosexuals themselves (we call the methodology  "Therapeutic Homophobia"). It's actually simple: just turn the revulsion global. It's really easy to project that revulsion as your default reaction to the male stimulus. Your revulsion to sex with gay men is converted eventually to revulsion to sex with all men. We call this process "Neo-heterosexualization". Homosexual men who can't stomach sex with other gay men (the A-listers) can easily convert. The less finicky gay men (formerly I called them Kevlarites for their incredibly tough Kevlar stomachs, but we now call them Simpletonites for obvious reasons) are not hopeless, they still have functioning gag reflexes despite their vestigial thought processes. They only need a crash course to improve their taste. While it's amazing they have a strong stomach that they appear capable of eating inside a toilet, most most gay men simply can't, having sex with another gay man is worse than eating the toilet itself.

Writing about this topic has not been easy so I needed the 9-month break. I told you I have been and am still fighting my own revulsion just to bring the light. Writing has become torture because I had to dig up really stomach-churning events in the past to buttress my arguments. It's stop and go- I take time off if my stomach complained too much. I thought I needed a long break to recover my breath from prolonged exposure to the stench. I really can't come out with a half-baked piece just to silence my friends who never stopped "haranguing" me to write again. I have to relive the most nauseous periods in my recent life. If that is not plain torture, I don't know what is. If not for compassion, I won't bother.


Everybody now talks about the surreal times, a collapsing Western civilization in slow motion. It's not really a big surprise after all the parade of the ignorant social engineers passing of as  intellectual progressives in recent times. Reckoning time is taking its toll, and gay politics is one of the worst manifestations of the malaise. It was never wise to turn revulsion into a trend, everybody else will be vomiting in no time ( (that's their tactic,  create contrived trends which only them had the stomach to patronize, so all the Muscle Mary's will vomit anyway in the end). Are gays really victims? Or those exposed to gays the real victims? How can one not be a victim when one is practically blackmailed not to puke? Actually, it is worse among A-lister gays themselves. They are blackmailed not to puke to some really revolting creatures just because they also happen to love same-sex sex, just so the ignorant progressive brigade can sell their delusion of gay marriage and other pretentious stuffs which, as if in a karma,  are reinforcing the crumbling malaise all around.

I've presented in previous posts the diminishing number of gay marriages in countries that adopted it after the initial uptick (from the initial enthusiasm of the simpletons who get excited by banal trendsettings). That only means you can't force people to fall in love in a situation more conducive to puking. In fact this business of forcing people to get horny with somebody who revolts them is taking its toll on the "getting horny" process itself. After the noisy  drive to promote gay models in gay porn,  from what I've  heard, gay porn subscription now goes  down to as low as $1  monthly (three years ago when I was still not neo-heterosexual, I paid about $30 minimum). Well, who wants to get off from revolting stimuli in the first place?

 I don't speak gay and sex in the same breath. They are mutually exclusive. I don't call paid sex with real straight man gay, I call it all-male sex. To me, gay sex is when you do it with gay men, and gay sex has always
been a complete no-no because the mere thought of having sex with another gay man always revolted me. True, I really puked many times. My friend Greg got hospitalized for severe vomiting when he mistakenly swallowed what he would later discover to be a muscular closet queen.  Calling it gay sex will turn it into a revolting exercise. Just a matter of semantics? Semantics is all. I am proud of the homophobic vocabulary of my desire. In my previous sex life, I was interested in all-male sex but no gay decor, sound or man, not even a hint, please!

I think it's wiser to ensure that straight men would be delicious. That means less gay, the better. One should have the humility to accept gay men are damaged goods in the Delicious Sex Department, and they should not spoil the whole display. I don't think you're oppressing anybody if you found them repulsive. I found the pretentious allegations that gay men are victims as phony, most people would rather avoid a revolting situation with a revolting person than waste time dealing with them. Politically blackmailing them to put up with their revulsion will oppress everybody in the end.

Being gay is no different from being ugly. Somebody just don't find you sexy. If ugly people, the majority  in the world, can live to old age without organizing to politically blackmail everybody about the injustice of not being beautiful, why should gays have the gall to force everybody to put up with their revulsion?

I believe in freedom. Politics shouldn't shackle you with the delusions of  the  pretentious just because they had the chutzpah to organize (they are just used by shadow powerbrokers for their power plays, as we have seen). Diversity means everybody can seek his own crowd but don't pretend everybody should be forced to swallow his revulsion. The world is wide enough for anybody to seek one's own niche of comfort so what for are these political movements to politically blackmail everybody to act as if they were made with the same level of sensivity? Gay men have always revolted other men (that includes most other gays) and everybody should be free not to swallow that revulsion. I don't even socialize with most gay men, much less have sex with them, why should I be politically forced to treat them as if I'm not revolted when I've vomited many times? The West is bankrupt and crumbling- has anybody ever thought that coincided with the flourishing of the gay movement in the West? Could it be most of the economists who have been forced to be "trendy" and put up were so disoriented with all the putting up that they vomited through their wrong conclusions & decisions? Very likely.

(Btw, as to the question, one should not be refused work due to his sexual orientation, I don't agree with that. A revolting presence will destroy the dynamics in the workplace. The slow-motion collapse of Western civilization is one of the unrecognized results of a revolting contamination of the Western workplace).

But I have to take a break now. My stomach is churning... I'll just tuck in the continuation here later. I told you this topic is not pleasant to the stomach.