Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Show:   Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest Per page:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#155 - chodes has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #154 - vanoreo (01/17/2013) [-]
I do it because I like attention...
#145 - kaycie (01/16/2013) [-]
righteous beard
righteous beard
User avatar #193 to #145 - gidmp (01/17/2013) [-]
Neigh...We are but men... ROCK!!! AAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!! Love that video
#141 - ackbobthedead (01/16/2013) [-]
I've never understood those anti-gay signs. (I know this one's not anti-gay)
If you're not okay with someone acting gay, then you're not okay with them being gay.
#186 to #141 - cabbagemayhem (01/17/2013) [-]
Actually, what someone does in their own time is their business. But, the sight of seeing two guys kiss or talk about butt-sex in public in on par with scrolling through 4chan for 20 minutes.
#247 to #186 - ackbobthedead (01/17/2013) [-]
Talking about sex in public is inappropriate no matter what kind.
And two people pecking shouldn't be sickening, no matter who they are.
However, people making out bother me, no matter what sexuality.
#285 to #247 - cabbagemayhem (01/17/2013) [-]
Are you serious? Are you trying to tell me that gender has nothing to do with these things? Gender cannot simply be taken out of the picture judged independently. Gender is, always was, and always will be central to sexually reproductive life. Humanity is not unisex, and gender is a significant and fundamental factor in human relations. It is not just "a wild and crazy tradition," but an aspect of nature.
#292 to #285 - ackbobthedead (01/17/2013) [-]
I have no idea why you are saying this stuff.
Explain to me what you think I said
#293 to #292 - cabbagemayhem (01/17/2013) [-]
You seemed to imply that gender is not a significant factor in the image of two people making out. I'm sorry if your wording confused me.
#302 to #293 - ackbobthedead (01/17/2013) [-]
I'm saying that the genders of the two people kissing should not effect your opinion on whether it's gross or bothers you at all.
#305 to #302 - cabbagemayhem (01/18/2013) [-]
That is naive. See comment #285.
#306 to #305 - ackbobthedead (01/18/2013) [-]
Whatever, man. I will continue with my open mindedness and acceptance, and you think whatever you want.
#307 to #306 - cabbagemayhem (01/18/2013) [-]
It's not open-mindedness, it's an entirely difference of opinion. Furthermore, you seem to prefer out-right rejecting my opinion without a reasonable discussion, so you might actually call it closed-mindedness.
#308 to #307 - ackbobthedead (01/18/2013) [-]
I don't think we're understanding each other here.
You're acting like I've been trying to insult you or something this whole time.
User avatar #146 to #141 - codyxvasco (01/16/2013) [-]
I think this sign is a joke, making fun of those who say, "I don't mind gays as long as they act straight in public"
User avatar #156 to #146 - thepandaking (01/17/2013) [-]
yeah but he's saying the original ones don't make sense, he knew this was a joke.
User avatar #158 to #156 - codyxvasco (01/17/2013) [-]
Eh, I'm having difficulty reading today.
User avatar #159 to #158 - thepandaking (01/17/2013) [-]
that's alright, I'm just pointing it out. didn't want any misunderstanding :)
#160 to #159 - codyxvasco (01/17/2013) [-]
**codyxvasco rolled a random image posted in comment #279 at American Doctor Who **   
'Tis all ok.
**codyxvasco rolled a random image posted in comment #279 at American Doctor Who **

'Tis all ok.
User avatar #162 to #160 - thepandaking (01/17/2013) [-]
very contradicting roll lol
User avatar #164 to #162 - codyxvasco (01/17/2013) [-]
*River hooks herself up to machine that will kill her to save thousands*

Doctor: You don't have to do this! Time can be rewritten!

River: Not those times! Not one line don't you dare!

User avatar #182 to #164 - thepandaking (01/17/2013) [-]
I watched some of the... 9th doctor? I think but I never finished it, nor have I seen the rest :S
but it's a good show. dem feels
User avatar #183 to #182 - codyxvasco (01/17/2013) [-]
Yooouuuuuuuuu should.

I recommend you finish 9. He's fantastic.
User avatar #184 to #183 - thepandaking (01/17/2013) [-]
yeah I really enjoyed it, but I think I just didn't want to get obsessed with another show lol. netflix is terribly convenient.
User avatar #185 to #184 - codyxvasco (01/17/2013) [-]
....Do you know Flame Fu?
User avatar #296 to #185 - thepandaking (01/17/2013) [-]
I do not, what's that?
User avatar #297 to #296 - codyxvasco (01/17/2013) [-]
Something The Panda King should know.
#135 - kuracha (01/16/2013) [-]
Yes he's just "ACTING"
#121 - jamsammich (01/16/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#128 to #121 - nexonman (01/16/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #173 to #128 - darknesincontrol (01/17/2013) [-]
Its The Rock's nemesis! The Paper
#119 - froller ONLINE (01/16/2013) [-]
**froller rolled a random image posted in comment #97315 at Friendly **
#117 - ryderjamesbudde **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#113 - elpinguinloco (01/16/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#98 - Brucis (01/16/2013) [-]
Haven't been on FJ for almost a week. What the **** is up with the high amount of thumbs for so many comments? Why is **** not going from newest to oldest? I see the order going #2, #10, #16, #17, #14 (what), #30, #43, #1 (again, what the **** ), etc. Is it based on thumbs? If so that's retarded, I like to read **** chronologically. I don't want to read 'wow what a ********** , the post that started a ********* , then the post saying thank god the ********** over, then the ********* because magical fairy princess decided to mess with the comments.
User avatar #176 to #98 - funkyrednipples (01/17/2013) [-]
Put them back then
User avatar #101 to #98 - alexthebest (01/16/2013) [-]
So..... change it back to newest first, bro.
#102 to #101 - Brucis (01/16/2013) [-]
Alright I see the option to make it newest now, still stupid he made it default to that. Can you explain the ridiculously high thumb counts on comments? Seeing 50 comments with over a hundred thumbs in the span of 10 minutes is depressing.
User avatar #111 to #102 - alexthebest (01/16/2013) [-]
It's probably because the default got changed for whatever reason. If high-thumbed stuff comes up first, it gets more views and then even more thumbs.

Thumb for you, my friend. No reason why they should get them all.
#118 to #111 - Brucis (01/16/2013) [-]
>If high-thumbed stuff comes up first, it gets more views and then even more thumbs

Really magical fairy princess? You make the newest uploads before the highest rated so people do more than thumb the already popular stuff, then you contradict yourself and do this. What ****** up logic is he working with? Why constantly change **** ? I really wish I knew how he thought.

Also, stop making me open your messages before I can delete them magical fairy princess. You're the reason I never check my inbox because 90% of the time it's useless **** I can't delete until I open it.
#226 to #118 - anonyrnoose (01/17/2013) [-]
I enjoy the Top Comment option. Now, I will no longer do that tedious ******** , and I can avoid the retarded **** that is the comments section.
User avatar #122 to #118 - alexthebest (01/16/2013) [-]
Woah. Will Smith. You're getting too close to me, Will Smith.
#124 to #122 - Brucis (01/16/2013) [-]
Is that so?
#91 - Cleavland Steamer (01/16/2013) [-]
There's something more terrifying to southerners:   
 A black  6'5" 380lb ex-SEC football player, covered in tattoos with a righteous beard, who is quite flamboyant.
There's something more terrifying to southerners:

A black 6'5" 380lb ex-SEC football player, covered in tattoos with a righteous beard, who is quite flamboyant.
User avatar #309 to #91 - SnugglyWuggly (01/19/2013) [-]
#281 to #91 - johnnyunderw (01/17/2013) [-]
Why is this not the top rated comment?!? it works so well with the post and I laughed for like 5 mins, Im crying. also where's my hmm yes perfect jpg when I need it?
Why is this not the top rated comment?!? it works so well with the post and I laughed for like 5 mins, Im crying. also where's my hmm yes perfect jpg when I need it?
#171 to #91 - xpeh (01/17/2013) [-]
I think someone like that would be terrifying to everyone, and not just southerners.
#137 to #91 - whyisthissohard **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#86 - defender (01/16/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#85 - thedutchs ONLINE (01/16/2013) [-]
Why are all the thumbs on all the content so high?!
#68 - bathroom **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#60 - byposted (01/16/2013) [-]
Except, "acting straight" in public is literally acting normal whereas, "acting gay" is walking around naked with a cock-ring on.

You cannot act based on a specific sexuality - unless that sexuality goes against social norms - which describes homosexuality. One cannot specifically, "act straight."

You need to login to view this link

The ******** of San Fransisco is having a debate on cock-rings, since it's full of fags and nudity is legal. People walk around with erections in public.

#76 to #60 - whyisthissohard **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#79 to #77 - whyisthissohard **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #80 to #79 - byposted (01/16/2013) [-]
Yes, they walk around with that on.

San Fransisco, like I described, is a leftist ******** .
#105 to #80 - whyisthissohard **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #58 - psykobear (01/16/2013) [-]
It's people like this that annoy me.
No one ever asked gays to not act gay, just to not act flamboyant.
The real enemies of the gay community is the gay community.
I don't mind gays as long as they're not shoving the fact that they are gay in peoples' faces.
I don't run down the street yelling, "I love vagina!"
It's the same with Bronies. You can like the show all you want, whatever.
But constantly posting pictures about it to shove the fact down peoples' throats is annoying.
#151 to #58 - ilikechocalatemilk **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#130 to #58 - tyraxio (01/16/2013) [-]
And this is where I come in and ask
A; Acting flamboyant and yelling "I LOVE COCK" are quite different things.
B; Why give a **** how people act in public?
User avatar #134 to #130 - psykobear (01/16/2013) [-]
A. I did exaggerate a bit. I wouls have thought of a better example, but I have things to do.
B. Why give a **** about what anti-gays think?
#138 to #134 - tyraxio (01/16/2013) [-]
A; Don't reply if you don't want to take time to reply.
B; Because they are keeping people from living their lives the way they want. Any belief that seeks to change any behaviour in anyone else that does not cause or promote any kind of suffering is a wrong belief.
User avatar #140 to #138 - psykobear (01/16/2013) [-]
The reason why it annoys me how flamboyants act in public is that it gives a bad name to homosexuals. I have a gay friend who is real cool, but flamboyant homosexuals become the poster child for all of them.
#147 to #140 - tyraxio (01/16/2013) [-]
Ahh, well, you kind of have a point, except it must feel kinda horrible to know that you can't be yourself because other people will be generalised, musn't it? Again, back to content, straight people having to act gay "or other straight people will be assumed to act straightly". I know this feeling. I have an opinion, which I won't write right now, because Funnyjunk seems to dislike it, which I discuss every once in a while on here. Everyone else is getting thumbed up for being aggressive towards me, and I keep up my respectful tone, until I need to let off some steam, and apparently everyone seems to think I am "such a bad representative for my community", which angers me. Why do I have responsibility for a community I am part of, when you don't?
User avatar #150 to #147 - psykobear (01/17/2013) [-]
P.S. Thank you for keeping a respectful tone :)
#153 to #150 - tyraxio (01/17/2013) [-]
Not a problem at all, and to you as well.
User avatar #149 to #147 - psykobear (01/16/2013) [-]
I wasn't being aggressive, and I'm sorry if it seemed I was. I had even thumbed up your last comment after reading it because you made a valid point.
What is our definition of flamboyant? I thought it was being loud and obnoxious about pink and rainbows and such just because you are homosexual.
By this definition, being flamboyant is more of a choice than acting yourself, isn't it?
Please, no one read this and think I'm saying being gay is a choice.
If I am defining flamboyant wrongly, please let me know.
#152 to #149 - tyraxio (01/17/2013) [-]
Oh no, no! Not you! Certainly not.

I say, being flamboyant is acting like Jack Sparrow. Best definition I can give.

But yeah. Even if loud and obnoxious about pink rainbow unicorn strapon dildos, I just see that as a laugh, and at the same time I find it cool that they are open about their sexuality. I think, oppositely, that it is as though being open about heterosexuality is a bit of a tabboo these days (you know, like being male, white etc.)
User avatar #157 to #152 - psykobear (01/17/2013) [-]
I went and looked up the definition. It is apparently just being loud and colorful, having nothing to do with what I said.
People have warped my definition of it, and we were talking of two different things.
Conclusion: You have changed my outlook
I believe we should end this thread before FJ starts to red thumb.
#78 to #58 - misticalz (01/16/2013) [-]
Just to sum at all up.
#71 to #58 - miaandvinny (01/16/2013) [-]
A lot of people ask gays to not be gay in public. Even just holding hands.
User avatar #74 to #71 - psykobear (01/16/2013) [-]
Didn't even think about that. You are correct.
But other than that line, I stand by my comment
#75 to #74 - miaandvinny (01/16/2013) [-]
And I agree with you on the rest of the comment.
User avatar #56 - lazypaul (01/16/2013) [-]
It's not just acting gay that's a problem. Being sexual in public at all is a pain in the ass.
User avatar #53 - lieutenantderp (01/16/2013) [-]
I never really understand how one can act gay. If a man is flamboyant, that doesn't necessarily mean he is gay, and vice versa. It's like telling a human to act human, or something dumb like that.
#50 - sammyjankiis (01/16/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #65 to #50 - sammyjankiis (01/16/2013) [-]
**** the guy who favorited but didnt thumb
User avatar #88 to #65 - sammyjankiis (01/16/2013) [-]
**** the guys thumbing this comment above and the guys who will thumb this one down.
#89 to #88 - sammyjankiis (01/16/2013) [-]
sorry im high
User avatar #43 - TashnaBakninh (01/16/2013) [-]
Today, I saw a MAN AND A WOMAN HOLD HANDS IN PUBLIC! I mean, I don't have anything against heterosexuality, but don't flaunt it in front of me... think about the children.
User avatar #49 to #43 - konradkurze (01/16/2013) [-]
well the way the world is going, with more gays coming out of the closet....soon hetero will be a minority and treated as outcast
User avatar #116 to #49 - gggman (01/16/2013) [-]
I doubt that many people are gonna choose to be gay
User avatar #123 to #116 - konradkurze (01/16/2013) [-]
gay isnt a choice, gay is something youre born with, the only choice is if they act on their impulses
#142 to #123 - whyisthissohard **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #127 to #123 - gggman (01/16/2013) [-]
You know, I find that hard to believe since our brains have been hardwired for millions of years for reproducing with the opposite sex because there's an actual result when they do, and it helped us survive. And then suddenly evolution is just gonna say, "let's mix things up and make any way you want possible"? idk about that.

I don't mean to offend anyone either so calm down.
User avatar #136 to #127 - konradkurze (01/16/2013) [-]
thats a funny thing called mutation....mainstream people are born nature intended but genetic mistakes do happen
mental issues are a common thing, and gender bending is one of them
User avatar #232 to #136 - meganinja (01/17/2013) [-]
Except... Homosexuals tend not to reproduce. Explain to me how it could be a genetic mutation that's going to become more prevalent. The gene would extinct itself, even if it were recessive, as those expressing the trait will lose their lineage, and therefore are unable to pass the gene on.
User avatar #237 to #232 - konradkurze (01/17/2013) [-]
lesbians can still get pregnant and gays can still donate sperm
and in some cases, for the gays who are still in the closet, can sleep with women and cause pregnancy normally
User avatar #242 to #237 - meganinja (01/17/2013) [-]
yes, but it's not going to spread more than heterosexuals births. A lot of homosexuals choose to adopt, as donating/receiving sperm to/from somebody will only give the genes of one of the two, so one partner would probably feel left out.
#251 to #242 - konradkurze (01/17/2013) [-]
This image has expired
straight people sadly include the trailer trash and ghetto **** that pop out babies like vending machines, thus contributing to babies fostered out and some end up adoptd by gays, and a number of those develop personality issues on their gender, thus possibly becoming bisexual as they try to figure out what they are

and youre forgetting.....gays may be slow at producing babies that carry their mutated genes BUT straight couples can also by chance have a kid born with the mutation
User avatar #259 to #251 - meganinja (01/17/2013) [-]
yes, that is all true, however, it is statistically improbable that homosexuals will ever outnumber heterosexuals. If there were any large benefit to survival by being homosexual, with our technology today, yes it could happen, but homosexuality isn't a trait that aids survival, and it is a trait that HINDERS reproduction. Not saying it's impossible, but you can't say that homosexuals have a lower chance of having children than heterosexuals. And about mutations, yes they do happen, but a mutation is a mutation, purely random. An entire society isn't going to suddenly have more mutations that lead to homosexuality, as mutations are always case by case, with no spread to others other than by reproduction.

In conclusion, yes it's possible, but there would have to be a genocide of heterosexuals, and then the homosexuals impregnating each other, assuming that there is one specific gene that causes homosexuality.
User avatar #266 to #259 - konradkurze (01/17/2013) [-]
well, heterosexuals have been sucessfully killing themselves and each other off for many years with one war after another
yes there are some gays that do serve in the military but most dont, and stay home while straight people die off

i doubt there is a 'gay gene' though koreans were able to come close with experiments on female mice by removing a gene from from them and said female mice were sexually attracted to other female mice
its doubtful the same gene rule appplies to humans

for humans it seems to be a simple mutation in the brain's chemistry and/or synaptic impulses that causes them to have abnormal thought processes, its possible that given all babies are born female, some didnt fully complete the transition to male going from XX-XY chromosomes, that a tiny fragment of some X chromo lingered and cuases feminine hormones in what should be a male child
User avatar #269 to #266 - meganinja (01/17/2013) [-]
Now we're talking about homosexuality by genetics here, I think it is possible for heterosexuals to be a minority if we're talking about society instead of genetics, but according to genetics it's an extremely high improbability. Yes, I suppose more heterosexual men enlist proportionally than homosexual men, but that's ignoring the women, where there are hardly any enlisted in the military. And while the proportion of men killed in military services is higher than homosexuals who do not reproduce, a very large section of mankind is not involved in military.

I'm not going to argue on how homosexuality occurs, whether it's moral (actually I probably would argue FOR that), or any of that **** , I'm just saying that heterosexuals aren't going to become a minority looking at things from a genetic point of view.
User avatar #280 to #269 - konradkurze (01/17/2013) [-]
well we live in a world that is geting more and more filled with innovation, which comes with more exposure to technology, chemicals, etc
mutations happened only here and there years ago but as mankind moves forwards it corrupts itself more and mutations are happening more

plus we dont know how things will go in the next major war, and there will be a world war 3, who knows how things will be for the survivors
User avatar #139 to #136 - gggman (01/16/2013) [-]
so technically, it's a mental illness?
#129 to #127 - mrgreatnames **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#90 to #49 - casadue (01/16/2013) [-]
what's the big deal? because now minorities are well treated, right? there's no misadvantage in being a minority, right?
#240 to #90 - brutalfistfuck (01/17/2013) [-]
<--Yes. I know that this isn't the usual way people use the Successful Black Man meme.
#246 to #240 - konradkurze (01/17/2013) [-]
This image has expired
kind of odd point
there is a technical difference between the pureblood monkeys in africa and the former slaves in usa who have the occasional white ancestor
User avatar #103 to #90 - konradkurze (01/16/2013) [-]
right, just ask any white person living in harlem....if there were any

black minority grew to be the majority and everyone else left out of fear of reprisal from the former minority

the middle east was largely muslim/islamic for many centuries, then israel was created for the jewish minority and look how truly ******* sweet the jews are to the former majority

race and religion have proven when the tides are turned, the former minorities spew forth all the accumulated generations of hate and return it to the opposite side that gave it....trouble is,....the laws that protect 'minorities' dont seem to be enforced when its the former minority rising up
#107 to #103 - whyisthissohard **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #112 to #107 - konradkurze (01/16/2013) [-]
they were the majority all over, then when the brits marked out the borders of israel and pumped jews in there, all other religions in 'israel' became minority....and since then, the jews have been pushing the borders to expand jewish lands into islamic territory

i think its pretty certain once they finally kill palestine, theyll push onto other nations

jews dont forgive, im sure they'll remember how much they hate egypt and syria too
#114 to #112 - whyisthissohard **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #115 to #114 - konradkurze (01/16/2013) [-]
well depends on how much more war in the middle east usa plans on, and how much they push their politics and religion on the arabs
#55 to #49 - miaandvinny (01/16/2013) [-]
I highly doubt that.
User avatar #59 to #55 - konradkurze (01/16/2013) [-]
people hating on former majorities turned minority hass happened all over the world for one reason another

it happened to the russians after the collapse of the soviet union....the russians were treated like **** by all and pushed back home
its happening in the middle east,...the islamics/muslims being pushed off their land by jews

its happened for race and religion, it will happen for sexuality....gays will be the vengeful minority that when THEY are the majority they will treat the hetero minority like ****
#61 to #59 - miaandvinny (01/16/2013) [-]
But gays won't become a majority.

Oh, and beating up straight people may get mud on their fabulous clothes that they brought with them out of the closet.
User avatar #63 to #61 - konradkurze (01/16/2013) [-]
gays will, the more mutations are allowed to integrate with the populace the more they spread the genetics

plus not every gay is a flaming fag in outfits...some do dress normally
User avatar #257 to #63 - vixenmacabre (01/17/2013) [-]
Being gay is not genetic/hereditary.
User avatar #263 to #257 - konradkurze (01/17/2013) [-]

there is that plus several others i could show you

it is a genetic issue, as a mental disorder just as much as transgenders are a physical disorder
its unknown if its hereditary because noone hasdont the research on it or usa is forbidding it to keep public opinion positive
#69 to #63 - miaandvinny (01/16/2013) [-]
So gays will become a majority? As in, their will be more gays than straights?

Ok, whatever you say
User avatar #70 to #69 - konradkurze (01/16/2013) [-]
not just gays but all the colors of the gender bent rainbow

gays, lesbians, transsexuals, transvestites, bisexuals, crossdressers, pansexuals

#72 to #70 - miaandvinny (01/16/2013) [-]
There still will be more straights.
User avatar #81 to #72 - konradkurze (01/16/2013) [-]
not for long, with gender bents rising, straight people will decline
#93 to #81 - anonymous (01/16/2013) [-]
Why is that a bad thing, anyway?

We're having a ******* population crises.
User avatar #97 to #93 - konradkurze (01/16/2013) [-]
exactly, and more gays means less pregnancies,..unless lesbians get more into having kids
#83 to #81 - miaandvinny (01/16/2013) [-]
It's true that mroe gay people will come out of the closet, but they will always be a majority.
#84 to #83 - miaandvinny (01/16/2013) [-]
User avatar #52 to #49 - TashnaBakninh (01/16/2013) [-]
Just imagine that. I'm kind of curious as to how the world will be in the future.
User avatar #54 to #52 - konradkurze (01/16/2013) [-]
well i keep thinking of a theory the scientists came up with several years ago

apparently the male Y chromosome is getting smaller over time, and in so they say, 200,000 years, it will be completely gone and the world will be populated by asexual women

makes sense when you think about it,...the slow rise of gays over the centuries is humanity mutating towards no more men....and gays are the evidence of men becoming more female as the male y-chromo loses strength
 Friends (0)