Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ah, so THERE is his Freudian excuse.

Of course. Freud, everybody loves that guy. Just like Piaget is favored for explaining how kids also develop.

We can also see Melissia's very obvious Penis Envy, there can be no other explanation for her tough guy facade. I mean, Freud was completely right about everything he ever said!

halonachos wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I like watching two women make out with each other, but they looked like sisters to me instead of domestic partners.

To me the above does not express the appearance of familial relations.

halonachos wrote:Of course. Freud, everybody loves that guy. Just like Piaget is favored for explaining how kids also develop.

We can also see Melissia's very obvious Penis Envy, there can be no other explanation for her tough guy facade. I mean, Freud was completely right about everything he ever said!

There's no tough guy facade. I don't pretend to be a dude. That's your thing, sister. Butch doesn't work very well for you though.

dogma wrote:

halonachos wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I like watching two women make out with each other, but they looked like sisters to me instead of domestic partners.

To me the above does not express the appearance of familial relations.

You just can't quite grasp what I am saying can you Dogma? Its not a convoluted point that you often like to make so that may be why you can't wrap your noggin' around it. The kiss itself nor the perceived making out of the two did not remind me of a familial relationship, nor does it make me think that they are sisters. I don't think that to be the truth honestly. However, as I have said before, based on physical features they look like sisters and I wanted to point that out.

So let me try to put this in terms that you may understand.

The two individuals portrayed in the multimedia footage appear to resemble two individuals with similar phenotypes, which would typically mean a similar hereditary ancestor. In this case, however, they do not share similar genotypes or synonymous mitochondrial DNA leading to the conclusion that they are not of the same progeny despite the perceived similarities in expressed phenotypes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:

halonachos wrote:Of course. Freud, everybody loves that guy. Just like Piaget is favored for explaining how kids also develop.

We can also see Melissia's very obvious Penis Envy, there can be no other explanation for her tough guy facade. I mean, Freud was completely right about everything he ever said!

There's no tough guy facade. I don't pretend to be a dude. That's your thing, sister. Butch doesn't work very well for you though.

Hey, I apparently have a thing for sisters I don't have so you must have a thing for a phallus that you don't have. Its only a fair trade after all.

It's after hours, there's no trading going on right now, you know that. Rules are rules.

Melissia wrote:

halonachos wrote:Of course. Freud, everybody loves that guy. Just like Piaget is favored for explaining how kids also develop.

We can also see Melissia's very obvious Penis Envy, there can be no other explanation for her tough guy facade. I mean, Freud was completely right about everything he ever said!

There's no tough guy facade. I don't pretend to be a dude. That's your thing, sister. Butch doesn't work very well for you though.

Your sig line contradicts this statement to me. For awhile I just assumed you were a dude using a lady pseudonym, then I switched to a penis envy scenario. That's pretty cemented.

AustonT wrote:

Melissia wrote:

halonachos wrote:Of course. Freud, everybody loves that guy. Just like Piaget is favored for explaining how kids also develop.

We can also see Melissia's very obvious Penis Envy, there can be no other explanation for her tough guy facade. I mean, Freud was completely right about everything he ever said!

There's no tough guy facade. I don't pretend to be a dude. That's your thing, sister. Butch doesn't work very well for you though.

Your sig line contradicts this statement to me. For awhile I just assumed you were a dude using a lady pseudonym, then I switched to a penis envy scenario. That's pretty cemented.

-+


Can't believe i'm jumping into this, but just because she thinks she's a Badass, she naturally has penis envy? Really?
I could see a them not being one and the same.

halonachos wrote:
You just can't quite grasp what I am saying can you Dogma?

I don't think you can either, which makes the following entirely speculative.

halonachos wrote:
The kiss itself nor the perceived making out of the two did not remind me of a familial relationship, nor does it make me think that they are sisters. I don't think that to be the truth honestly. However, as I have said before, based on physical features they look like sisters and I wanted to point that out.

Would you point that out had they hugged? Or had they shared a hearty handshake?

I don't think you would. I think that you attempted to stretch what is, honestly, not even a passing resemblance between two females into an excuse for objecting to their kiss that allowed you to save a certain "masculine" face in front of yourself.

Ahtman wrote:

halonachos wrote:Yeah, it was just a blatant use of mass media to show that they were special because they were homosexuals.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was actually the Navy behind it, not these two women on their own. Pretending that it is a mundane act when it has been illegal for your entire life up to this point is a bit disingenuous. A year ago this act would have gotten her booted from the service and today it is nothing, and that is something.

It definitely seemed like a staged event with carefully selected participants to me, also. I don't think it would have gone over as well if it were two less attractive women puttin' the old make on each other.
I imagine that somewhere, someone said that a couple of totaly butch types having at it is not something that makes good publicity for a groundbreaking event. Go find a photogenic couple and put them in front of a camera to help the public become better acclimated to the concept.

dogma wrote:

halonachos wrote:
You just can't quite grasp what I am saying can you Dogma?

I don't think you can either, which makes the following entirely speculative.

halonachos wrote:
The kiss itself nor the perceived making out of the two did not remind me of a familial relationship, nor does it make me think that they are sisters. I don't think that to be the truth honestly. However, as I have said before, based on physical features they look like sisters and I wanted to point that out.

Would you point that out had they hugged? Or had they shared a hearty handshake?

I don't think you would. I think that you attempted to stretch what is, honestly, not even a passing resemblance between two females into an excuse for objecting to their kiss that allowed you to save a certain "masculine" face in front of yourself.

You still don't get it, trying to use psychology against a psychology major(double majoring Dogma) isn't going to work so you can take your Freud and Piaget(the kiddie blocks of psychology) and just walk away.

No, I would say that they look like sisters regardless and I am not using the fact that they look like sisters to "save face" because I know my own personal Jungian personality traits. To me they look like sisters and I am not objecting to their kiss based on that alone, I mean sisters kiss all of the time on the internet. What I object to is the fact that this wasn't something that happened out of the blue, if you have ever been to a homecoming, families aren't taken one-by-one to meet their loved ones. Its more of a crowd stands near the docks under a tent and wait for their loved ones. How do I know this, because I've been to my fair share of homecomings and each time it was cold as hell and we stood under a large tent while we waited for the ship to dock and then for everybody to get off. This was staged because this is not how homecomings are.

@ Melissia, I have never tried to act like a tough guy, in fact I recall saying that I am indeed a family man. Although I wouldn't mind beating the crap out of a pedophile or kidnapper, I think that's a rather common sentiment for any male worth their salt.

Those Little Rock Nine sure are trying to get attention and pretend they're special just because they're black, huh.

People go to school all the time, why are they special for going to school? Why is this news?

Rented Tritium wrote:Those Little Rock Nine sure are trying to get attention and pretend they're special just because they're black, huh.

People go to school all the time, why are they special for going to school? Why is this news?

That wasn't staged though, there is a difference here.

halonachos wrote:
You still don't get it, trying to use psychology against a psychology major(double majoring Dogma) isn't going to work so you can take your Freud and Piaget(the kiddie blocks of psychology) and just walk away.

Neither Piaget nor Freud have anything to do with my criticism of your position, as I'm not attempting anything approaching the analysis of your development as a person. I'm speculating as to the rationale behind your comments, which strike me as very odd, or at least ill-considered.

halonachos wrote:
No, I would say that they look like sisters regardless and I am not using the fact that they look like sisters to "save face" because I know my own personal Jungian personality traits.

Now now, don't drag Jungian typology into this mess, it has enough problems to deal with.

halonachos wrote:
To me they look like sisters and I am not objecting to their kiss based on that alone, I mean sisters kiss all of the time on the internet.

Yes, black women do kiss all the time, on the internet.

halonachos wrote:
This was staged because this is not how homecomings are.

Of course it was staged, so what? Are you under the impression that these women would not have kissed were there no cameras present?

dogma wrote:Me thinks someone is sexually frustrated.

Very Freudian of you, just because someone has an objection against televising and broadcasting one's sexual preference does not mean they have repressed some sort of sexual urges of the id. "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, or is it?" my ass. And to tie Freud exclusively to personal development shows how little you actually know about the subject. You were trying to find a "hidden meaning" in my responses, so the next time you decide to play with your blocks remember that they have six sides instead of just one.

Would those women have kissed if there were no cameras present, most likely. But in everyone's lifetime they take at least one gak and I have yet to see someone taking a gak broadcast across the nation by a news network.

halonachos wrote:Yeah, which is why one of them called the mass media.

Its was the ships "first kiss" upon return from deployment. The media was there to capture the moment. So the "Navy" had to know. The media didn't know is was going to be a "Homosexual" or "same-sex" kiss... not that theres anything wrong with that...

Byte wrote:

halonachos wrote:Yeah, which is why one of them called the mass media.

Its was the ships "first kiss" upon return from deployment. The media was there to capture the moment. So the "Navy" had to know. The media didn't know is was going to be a gay kiss... not that theres anything wrong with that...

"Homosexual" or "same-sex" kiss.

halonachos wrote:

dogma wrote:Me thinks someone is sexually frustrated.

Very Freudian of you...

Not particularly, no. Simply referencing sexuality does not make a statement Freudian.

halonachos wrote:
...just because someone has an objection against televising and broadcasting one's sexual preference does not mean they have repressed some sort of sexual urges of the id.

No, it doesn't, though if we're going to carry the Freudian mantra, it often does.

halonachos wrote:
And to tie Freud exclusively to personal development shows how little you actually know about the subject.

Freud's only significant contributions to modern psychology were tied to the development of personalities, largely driven by sexuality. This lead him to develop psychoanalysis, which for him was grounded in psychosexuality. He did other things as well, but then so has everyone else. People don't hear the name Lewis Carroll and think "Oh, that guy who worked with matrix algebra?"

halonachos wrote:
You were trying to find a "hidden meaning" in my responses, so the next time you decide to play with your blocks remember that they have six sides instead of just one.

Yes, but I don't expect you to be honest about your side, because I don't expect anyone to be honest about their side.

halonachos wrote:
Would those women have kissed if there were no cameras present, most likely. But in everyone's lifetime they take at least one gak and I have yet to see someone taking a gak broadcast across the nation by a news network.

You seem to be struggling with the idea that some events are made remarkable by context. You should work on that.

Media just doesn't "show up" on a Navy base, on a Navy pier, past Navy security. Just saying.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

halonachos wrote:

Byte wrote:

halonachos wrote:Yeah, which is why one of them called the mass media.

Its was the ships "first kiss" upon return from deployment. The media was there to capture the moment. So the "Navy" had to know. The media didn't know is was going to be a --- kiss... not that theres anything wrong with that...

"Homosexual" or "same-sex" kiss.

Good point. Fixed.

Actually, during homecomings local media is more than welcome to show up to the base in order to tape it. More likely than not the local media filmed it and then sent it off to MSNBC because we didn't get that type of media coverage from then during the earthquake we had earlier this year.

I'm also mad at Reuters for saying that it happened in Portsmouth, VA and then saying it was on a Virginia Beach pier. P-town sucks, VB is the best city of the 757.

halonachos wrote:Actually, during homecomings local media is more than welcome to show up to the base in order to tape it. More likely than not the local media filmed it and then sent it off to MSNBC because we didn't get that type of media coverage from then during the earthquake we had earlier this year.

I'm also mad at Reuters for saying that it happened in Portsmouth, VA and then saying it was on a Virginia Beach pier. P-town sucks, VB is the best city of the 757.

You seem to think I'm speculating. This was a set up. You can even see the "girlfriend" even being escorted up. It's ok... really... The boat notified the media, I'm not making this up.
http://www.wvec.com/video?id=136004313&sec=566327

Byte wrote:

halonachos wrote:Actually, during homecomings local media is more than welcome to show up to the base in order to tape it. More likely than not the local media filmed it and then sent it off to MSNBC because we didn't get that type of media coverage from then during the earthquake we had earlier this year.

I'm also mad at Reuters for saying that it happened in Portsmouth, VA and then saying it was on a Virginia Beach pier. P-town sucks, VB is the best city of the 757.

You seem to think I'm speculating. This was a set up. You can even see the "girlfriend" even being escorted up. It's ok... really... The boat notified the media, I'm not making this up.
http://www.wvec.com/video?id=136004313&sec=566327

Pretty much proves what everybody already knows. Like I said earlier, those two were most likely hand picked to do this over a more butch couple, since this is on the same plane as a recruiting poster or video. Can't have the uglies kissing for the camera now, can we?

AustonT wrote:Your sig line contradicts this statement to me. For awhile I just assumed you were a dude using a lady pseudonym, then I switched to a penis envy scenario. That's pretty cemented.

Bah.

You philistine.

You wouldn't know a good sci-fi quote if it slapped edited in your spicehole and said "you have mouth ,but you won't be able to scream".

The military helped set up a photo op to display/advertise a change in policy, and try to cultivate good publicity?

Shock and amazement!

EDIT: Melissia, some of the folks here aren't sci-fi fans. Care to cite the sources for each of those items?

dogma wrote:Freud's only significant contributions to modern psychology were tied to the development of personalities, largely driven by sexuality. This lead him to develop psychoanalysis, which for him was grounded in psychosexuality. He did other things as well, but then so has everyone else

His model for social development was pretty important as well. Or are we just talking about what he's known for by people who don't really know what they're talking about?

Though Freud is a pretty big stone to throw around this collection of glass houses we call the OT Forum.

Mannahnin wrote:The military helped set up a photo op to display/advertise a change in policy, and try to cultivate good publicity?

Shock and amazement!

It's unprecedented!

If Freud's theories had any predictive value, I'd respect him a lot more. Of course now I'm just quoting my old department head/student advisor.

[/just another former Soc & Psych major]

They make cute couple

Monster Rain wrote:
His model for social development was pretty important as well.

I thought that was all bound up in psychosexuality, but then I haven't read Freud in years.

Monster Rain wrote:
It's unprecedented!

Spoiler:

Its not like the military advertises or anything.

dogma wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:
His model for social development was pretty important as well.

I thought that was all bound up in psychosexuality, but then I haven't read Freud in years.

Oh, there's a lot of that in there, but the very idea that "The child is the father of the man" was huge, and influenced a lot of people who are also kind of a big deal in the field. Erik Erikson, Jung, Adler, etc.

I think that I understand what you were saying, since Freud's development models were tied into sexuality, but people who don't get the distinction tend to think that it just means that if you behave in a certain way you secretly want balls on your face.

Monster Rain wrote:...but people who don't get the distinction tend to think that it just means that if you behave in a certain way you secretly want balls on your face.

Ah yes, the "You mentioned sex, ergo you must be arguing from Freud." position.