/pone/ - My Little Pony

We must secure the existence of our people, and a future for white children.

>>297525

Seconded.

I know that in novel production, the big name publishers require gay characters, presented in the best possible light.

>>297522

LOL, if this become canon it will show that she's neglected/ignored because her caregivers are too busy being typical lezzies (Ie; Hedonistic and abusive to each other) to actually look after her.

>>297522

so scootaloo is confirmed for orphan that was adopted (that is the only part I really care about)

>>297523

>>297525

>>297527

>>297528

See you next week.

>>297547

nah. Vogel and Nicole Dubuc, someone who don't know shit about the show, a shit writer, deliberately ignored that part, and came up with the idea of Scootaloo being raised by two lesbian ponies no one ever heard of in seven years, that's just a lot already.

Lyra and BonBon ? Who are those?

Nah the idea is totally to make sure MLPFIM goes in line with the politically correct and mandatory presence of confirmed, certified LGBTQIAP characters in every kids cartoons.

Since when are the books canon?

Damn, I really thought Hasbro were the ones blocking this kind of thing. But no doubt it'll be in an episode next season now. Hopefully it will only pervert one episode I can skip, but that may be wishful.

>>297528

Vogel fucked deliberately the scenario of the pony movie, because he wanted it to be still shittier than his beloved Disney. He never took any risk, he never developed anything, had no consistency in the writing or scenario, he didn't do shit to promote the movie, as something like that should be more like your baby; your creation!

Vogel is a fucking Disney fan and don't want ponies to be anything like a challenger.

"Hmm, maybe that's too intense, no let's make things simplier, more average, let's reduce the ponies into poor little harmless things devoid of magic. Oh! Here's the scenario so far so let's discuss with someone like Sia, here, who never watched a single episode of MLPFIM, if she agrees with it and I'll modify it again."

>>297564

>>297563

gamers had gamergate

comics didn't, and they went to shit

toys didn't, and you got idiots running around the scene there. Goldieblox for instance, which tries to get "girls into stem fields" by shaming those who like princesses and dresses as weak and dumb compared to their "cool" counterparts.

the toy industry really doesn't realize how backwards their policies go. instead of selling, it tarnishes their brands and people stop buying them because young kids are not interested. Barbie lost hundreds of millions because of the fat barbies yet they don't want to see it. IDW lost 90% yet they think its all marvel's fault and not the fact nobody likes a fat lady as the leader of the gi joes.

The only way this would work is if the bronies got their act together, petitioned hasbro and called for them to remove any insertion of political ideology from the real world, since it is not the job of companies to educate children on a one-sided political ideology but rather have a timeless fantasy world with its own problems that come from the way that fantasy world works.

>>297567

Anon, the problem isn't that there are lesbo pones in the show.

the problem is that they are pushed in there only for political purposes and not for storytelling purposes.

>>297567

But anon, I was into mlp because of the show, not because of some fans shitty headcannon.

>>297567

>fans like lesbian horses, so they can't complain about them in the show

>some fans also wanna fuck the cmc/granny smith

>better add those too

This logical progression is so retarded, that it has to be bait.

>>297597

we /polne/ now

>>297599

>anthro

>and flat chest

Pick one heresy, not two

>>297602

It's hard to find r34 like this

seeing as it's a nazi trap poni

>>297566

>dubs tell the truth

>>297574

I'd argue it's less to do with 'think of the children!' and more to do with keeping MLP a source of escapism from the political degeneracy of the current year.

But considering what they've already been doing to the Transformers comics, I'd say this unfortunate turn is overdue.

>>297522

>those cutie marks

Is that … seriously? Is that for real?

So, the earth pony's "sun" is a heart, showing a tropical island, and the pegasus aunt has a flying sheep.

> Scoots confirmed for mud-blood

One is a whore, and the other is a sex toy delivery service? What on EQUESTRIA could those cutie marks possibly mean? No wonder Scoot's parents are never around … they work the "evening shift" and probably shout at each other about who drank all the hard cider their last … friend gave them.

>>297621

>Is that … seriously? Is that for real?

i think that picture is just from the fandumb

>>297623

You have to go back, /leftyfur/

Well guys, if it actually happens, what then? Do we drop everything pony, delete our folders, throw away our merch and pretend it never happened? Part of me refuses to allow anything to corrupt the good memories i have despite the show gradually getting worse over time. It probably also helps that i have yet to see season 6 and 7. maybe well get lucky and the soccer moms are still pearl-clutchers who wont allow their kids to see anything thats not basic polygon shapes on a screen. I don't know, it seems that since 1990 everything I've ever enjoyed is slowly being taken. Pony is the only thing that i enjoy after coming home from work, id hate to have to throw it all away.-

>>297629

this i can actually agree with, hell id prefer them canonize lyra and bonbon over some fucking shitty old hag OC's.

>>297635

>Human vagina

Nasty :^)

>>297628

>implying you wouldn't her boipucci

>>297651

Applejack, clearly.

>>297651

Celestia

If normal guys can start getting desensitized to porn & developing extreme fetishes in twenty years imagine how deprived she is after a few thousand.

>>297660

>Frame-specific screenshots of ponies walking / falling past each other = lesbian

no u

>>297661

>Frame-specific screenshots of ponies walking / falling past each other = lesbian

Does anyone here have the old My Little Pony commercial where two female ponies were kissing each otheron the mouth over and over with little hearts flying around them? I love the last line of the song played over that commercial: "I love her like a frieeeeend."

I love how you faggots bitch about politics being shoehorned into pony, yet you went wild for the Season 5 opener BTFOING TEH COMMUNIJISM!!!1!!!!1.

>>297668

>necro-pedo-bestial-interdimensional-incest

Still too vanilla. She's been alive so long she's probably personally invented fetishes not even we could think of.

>>297672

She would still draw the line at >no hooves, though. Celestia has class.

>>297629

>like we've been wanting the whole time.

>we

>implying

>>297631

>canonize lyra and bonbon over some fucking shitty old hag OC's.

>he wants headcanons to be canon

fuck no

>>297660

are goons trying to make the whole lezbo thingy normal?

>>297725

Our board activity has increased, meaning that a number of faggots have decided to come by and start shit.

Just ignore them for the most part.

>>297727

>muh sekrit club

>>297740

>>>/reddit/

>>297741

not an argument

>>297766

Either way it's good. It's nice to have more than the usual three faggots here.

The current MLP was created by a hardcore feminist in a field where far left people are the top positions of influence, from the voice talent to the people running things.

I don't know what you were expecting, anon

>>297777

And we've all spent years of our lives worshipping it. Ain't that a kick?

>>297781

A sign of good writing is that the story largely allowed to speak for itself, and doesn't have the author's views and opinions shoved into it.

Whether that will hold true in the years to come for MLP remains anyone's guess

>>297777

>The current MLP was created by a hardcore feminist

yes and it didnt affect the show, because they didnt insert their shitty politics in it and luckily she went full retard after the whole medusa movie drama

There is a lot of shit they are getting away with in the comics and books, lets see how retarded will they go in the show.

>>297784

>A sign of good writing is that the story largely allowed to speak for itself, and doesn't have the author's views and opinions shoved into it.

That's not true at all. Great novels are full of the authors' opinions on various issues. It's only the genre writers who shy away from that.

>>297766

i think its this, i lurked for 4 years, but with recent events i figured i wanted to put my input in on this upcoming drama.

ITT: Fat fucks who jerk off to lesbian horses getting mad about lesbian horses.

>>297812

projection

>>297812

but i don't though, i only get off to solo mare pics. And im of healthy weight

>>297803

Canon lesbian horses confirmed for the best thing that has happen to ponies in years.

>>297828

Ignore this Anon, he's gone mental

>>297828

The problem with this is, that if this goes through, you can guarantee that they'll be putting in trannies after the gays. Give and inch, take a mile.

>>297812

You're thinking of Fallout: Equestria, aka "Lesbian Horses with Guns"

>>297812

If you can't see the difference between jerking off to lesbian horses and lesbian horses being pushed as a political point & as parents in mlp I dunno what to tell you

>>297766

This board used to be fun till /pol/ took over.

There's not a single scotaloo aunt r34 image posted ITT instead mad cucks are whining about

>muh lesbian horses

Guess what retards we asked for lesbians for 7 FUCKING years

Dont look a gift horse in the mouth

>>297833

Slippery slope is a logical fallacy.

>>297835

If your political battleground is a cartoon about talking horses, then your politics are ridiculous.

>>297840

I don't think that /pol/ "took over" so much as they kept talking loudly while everyone else found progressively less to talk about. It's honestly incredible how they are able to keep their interest in something like the twitter thread that has hundreds of replies. It's almost like a rage-based fetish.

But yeah, where the fuck is the porn already? Back in the day there would have been volumns of porn about canon lesbians by now. Remember how much porn we got of Rainbow Dash molesting Scootaloo after "Sleepless In Ponyville" aired? Good times.

>>297848

>political battleground is a cartoon about talking horses

You are one dumb sack of shit mate

I'm not saying it's some retarded ass 'battleground'

They are pushing a political point. If I need to elaborate further on that sentence you are too stupid to live.

I do not want political shit in my ponies, what do you not understand about this.

Fapping to lesbian horses because they are hot is very different from lesbian horses being pushed as parents for no reason other then to insert political views in mlp.

>>297855

>They are pushing a political point.

The only people making anything political out of it are you idiots. Gay people existing is not a political point. Having them exist in fiction is just a reflection of reality.

>I do not want political shit in my ponies

So, how much did you hate the Season Five premier?

>>297858

>Having them exist in fiction is just a reflection of reality

You are literally just too stupid to live. How are you still breathing lad, I'd think you'd have forgotten by now. My little pony is not supposed to be nor trying to be a reflection of reality. It takes more effort to add lesbians to the show then it does to add straight parents, so why would they bother? Because they're bleeding heart liberals who are, guess, injecting their politics into the show.

>>297862

>My little pony is not supposed to be nor trying to be a reflection of reality.

Art always reflects reality, even when its just commercial shit.

>It takes more effort to add lesbians to the show then it does to add straight parents

LOL WUT. Is finding two female voice actors more difficult than finding one male and one female actor? You really have gone full retard.

>>297872

>LOL WUT

Ah, I see why you're acting so retarded now.

You're from reddit.

>>297880

>thinks that came from reddit

How new are you?

>>297880

And don't think I don't see that you are trying to ignore every point that blows you the fuck out. You lose.

>>297886

please do not respond to /leftypol/ faggots

>>297894

>talking about qt boys!

faggot

>>297941

Aryanne isn't canon and potentially beamed to children's televisions.

>>297942

>literally think of the children

>>297948

>Let's enjoy the fucking porn that is to come out of this.

i hope the aunts get turned straight in the fandumb porn.

>>297950

>Not wanting incest porn

>>297948

>I am literally retarded and all I can think about is porn

>What do you mean unnecessary politics? Think of the porn.

>Stupid /pol/tards, there's art of Aryanne being a lesbian. Just think of the porn

>Posts gay porn

Thanks for outing yourself you dumb lefty faggot.

>>297960

Look mate, I like porn just as much as the next guy

What I don't like is politics in my fugging ponies

Trying to obviously distract from the scenario at hand with retarded shit like 'It's okay there'll be porn of it' just makes you look a. like an especially stupid shill of some sort or b. just a general all-round stupid person. You can't just ignore this and pretend it's not happening because "muh porn"

>>297943

Children shouldn't be exposed to faggots anons. Especially no one here. If I could I'd ban pride parades.

>>297948

I draw pony porn anons. That doesn't mean I think children should be exposed to it.

Are some of you being retarded on purpose?

>>297952

I like your take on it.

>>297972

Have you seen our twitter thread? I'm suprised it took them this long tbh.

>>297972

too many people lost hope and just stopped giving a fuck. Simultaneously, too many people just abandoned what few standards they had left and started jerking off the writers whenever they shoehorned in something shit.

>>297958

See >>297960

This is the pony board.

>>297969

>Moralfagging this hard

I looked at porn all the time as a kid, it was great.

>>297961

>What I don't like is politics in my fugging ponies

The only people who are making this political are you retards.

>>297969

>Children shouldn't be exposed to faggots anons.

>think of the children!

Where did all these soccer moms come from?

>>297952

>but kids might.

>kids

>smart

>>297975

>I'm suprised it took them this long tbh.

i guess hasbro was against that shit, but odds are it will be on the shitty book, they dont control or give a fuck about quality on the comics or books

except for the good sombra and celestia kiss

>>298013

>The only people who are making this political are you retards.

This. point at them and laugh.

>>298080

>>298013

>don't say that its political, you make it political

that's not an argument. they want pony to be devoid of politics, and by saying that, they are suddenly the ones wanting it to be political?

How does that even work?

>>298086

>so autistic he has to drag politics into a show about cartoon ponies.

>>298082

>>298086

There is nothing political about the mere presence of a gay character in fiction, because the existence of gay people is not in question. All the political bullshit here is coming from the /pol/tards.

>>298092

Gay people are a small fraction of the population so of course Including them is a deliberate political statement.

t. masturbates furiously to lesbian ponies on the semi-regular basis.

>>298092

>everyone I do not like is a /pol/tard; the manchild's political guide to online political discussion

>>298094

Using characters who belong to an uncommon group is inherently political? How does that work logically?

>>298102

because there's no reason to include the unlikely unless you want to make a statement about them.

>>298102

The problem with them isn't that they are gay, its that they are SJW virtue signalling forced into a show that has nothing to do with it, not because they add anything to the premise, not because they are interesting by themselves or are there to be used to tell an interesting story, but because some SJW's gotta virtue signal.

Its that they are used to make a political statement that has nothing to do with the show purely because the writers want to ram their political view down the viewers throats. Kind of like every single episode of Steven Universe.

Why are there two threads about this?

One for this news article and a thread about the dumb petition and counter petition. Surely it should be one thread?

>>298102

These days, yes, using gay characters is political because when Lefties create anything, it's political. Everything they do they do because they have to 'Resist Trump!', because we've already had decades of marxism in schools and tv. It gets real fuckin' tiring. And ever since Trump won the election, the Left have gone hysterical and driven everything into turbo mode, which is exactly what this lesbian aunts thing is. It's a spiteful lefty spurred on by spiteful sore loser lefties desperately trying to cram their ideologies into places it doesn't belong.

MLP was one of the few sources of escapism left I enjoyed that wasn't tainted by modern politics, and that's the way I hope it stays.

>>298103

That is completely illogical. Every identity group represents a minority. Australians are uncommon in Canada. Putting an Australian character in a Canadian TV show is not a political statement. Now, if said Australian were to point out the failings of the Canadian political system relative to the Australian system, then that would be political.

>>298104

>not because they are interesting by themselves or are there to be used to tell an interesting story

That is an assumption. Why assume that?

>>298107

>because when Lefties create anything, it's political

It looks more like you are reacting politically to something that is not itself political. Where does politics enter into this? When they came up with the idea for two characters that make no political statement? Are their creators to blame, because they should have known that you would react politically to their creations?

>>298108

You seem to be experiencing some difficulties. Might I recommend a remedy?

http://archive.is/Kwnv5

>>298110

Not an argument.

>>298108

Let me use your own analogy. A Canadian TV show puts an Australian character into the show. There is currently an ongoing war between Australia and Canada. The writer was written the Australian character into the show because he agrees with Australia. The Australian character does not say or do anything explicitly political, but he is still in the show as a political point. Every argument given so far, 'it's a reflection of reality', 'it's not political because they're not spouting politics' is retarded if you see it in this fashion.

>>297943

THINK OF THE FUTURE OF THE WHITE CHILDREN. BUT SERIOUSLY THIS TIME.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT PORN? YOU DONT WANT TO SHOW KIDS PONY PORN. THIS IS ILLEGAL I HOPE YOU AGREE WHY.

THIS SHOULD BE THE SAME ABOUT FAGGOTRY TAUGHT TO KIDS.

>>297856

There might be a S8 but definitively no S9. Things are changing at Hasbro, it might be another studio being acquired or something as far as I know. Maybe that one in Dublin.

But right now the fandom is now going to be used for this kind of marxist shit.

What's next? more zebras, gay ponies, ponies voting for Twilight or Glimmer as the President of Equestria? Purple Tinker's OC?

We have to destroy what we built so they won't have it. It is the best way it has to go, and it won't hurt us.

>>298092

>There is nothing political about the mere presence of a gay character in fiction, because the existence of gay people is not in question. All the political bullshit here is coming from the /pol/tards.

This. They really believe the World is going to end because of a gay character in a cartoon show. Not even taking into account how they are already a failure for watching it in the first place.

>>298115

>The Australian character does not say or do anything explicitly political, but he is still in the show as a political point.

What kind of political point is that? What does it say? That Australians exist? A war between Australia and Canada does not mean that it is political for Canadians to acknowledge the plain fact that there are Australians in the world. Simply writing an Australian character is not an endorsement of Australian politics. Was Photo Finish an endorsement of Austrian politics? Was Gustav le Grande a statement of support for France? They are not political characters until they actually make a political point.

>>298138

Generally, anon, warring countries dislike each other. In case you don't realize, 'country' in this scenario is referring to political views.

I'm honestly surprised this didn't happen much earlier.

Sign for lesbian horses

https://www.change.org/p/hasbro-add-homosexuality-and-loving-staff-to-my-little-pony

>>298455

hey /leftypol/

You have to wonder how many people have actually had to deal with lesbians. I've never met one who wasn't generally filthy or unpleasant.

>>298457

>Muh politics

This is a pony board

>>298464

All the more reason for you to fuck off back to >>/leftypol/ and taking your political shilling with you then.

>>298465

(2)

>>298139

That is not a logical response. What political statement does it make?

>>298147

>people here kept watching after season 1 finale

>>297522

Fuck this. Its all over. Fuck it all. MLP is dead to me. I might've forgiven them just making those two dumb bitches Lyra and Bon-Bon faggots, but screwing with Scootaloo was the last straw. Fuck all of this.

>>297552

>See you next week.

Nope. Thread having died a month ago is proof enough of that.

>>297623

>>297584

>>297948

>>297941

>>298455

And here I thought the /b/rony fags and /leftypol/ horse fuckers died out and ran off to the steven universe board.

>>298480

>What political statement does it make?

That gays are okay when they are just another genetic abnormality. You never see any siamese twins or people with serious deformities in kids cartoons because there is nothing okay about them. Just a reminder of imperfection. They probably would be forced into kids media more often, except that they don't carry the baggage of a political message of liberal faggotry tied to them, and they're just a fraction of the population too.

>>299398

>That gays are okay when they are just another genetic abnormality.

They are a pretty fucking common abnormality judging by all the futafags here.

>>299725

Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual's make up around 5%-3% of the population in most western countries.

They are just a very loud and obnoxious minority that all the politics somehow have to revolve around.

>>299739

>https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Gates-How-Many-People-LGBT-Apr-2011.pdf

Says 3.5% for the US as of 2011

>https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/585349/PHE_Final_report_FINAL_DRAFT_14.12.2016NB230117v2.pdf

Says 2.5% of Great Britain as of 2017

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_sexual_orientation

I know, I know, but Wikipedia does have numbers from many surveys from around the world.

You may find this piece from Gallup interesting as it investigates why so many americans think there are far more LGB's in their country than there actually is.

http://news.gallup.com/poll/183383/americans-greatly-overestimate-percent-gay-lesbian.aspx

Coincidentally, they say 3.8% of the US in 2015 as the actual number of LGB's

>>299746

Notice that what they are tallying is the number of people who identify as gay, straight, or bisexual not what actually turns them on or even who they have sex with. Most girls who fuck girls are not waving rainbow flags around. Check the figures gathered in 2002.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ad/ad362.pdf

Of course, that is from fifteen years ago (the numbers are likely much higher now), but you can see that the percentage of women who reported having had sexual intercourse with another woman was at 11%. That is actual sex acts, not just identity. It does not consider how many women were actually attracted to other women either, the number of whom can only be significantly greater than the number of those who actually had sex with women.

Speaking to the difference between identity and real sexual activity and attraction, women are not the only ones who call themselves gay significantly less frequently than they act gay. Of course, admitting to finding men sexually attractive is another thing entirely. Look at all the fans of "feminine penises" here.

https://www.webmd.com/sex/news/20060918/many-straight-men-have-gay-sex

>>299743

Would you prefer to hear it from a Murdoch-owned paper?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2051284/More-half-women-bi-curious-attracted-women.html

>>299748

Oh, and hey the Center for Disease Control did a more complete follow-up just last year! Surprise, the numbers went up.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr088.pdf

>>297522

you know what.. enough… what happened to just enjoying pony because pony? who the fuck cares if a cannon gay couple happened, obviously someone had to have straight sex or atleast get impregnated artificially to make the younger ponies in the show, so it isn't like they are saying gays suddenly breed and straights are going extinct.. it isnt like they are trying to tell you that you have to be gay… a cannon gay couple happened.. guess what pepsi happened too but i might still choose coke when i eat out if they have both options.

in b4 what if i was born gay, seriously fucker? everyone is born with the capacity to find arousal, or be turned off by random things in both genders. it is possibble to not be into guys at all while still clopping to lots of m on f porn. it is also possible to not be into pussy but still find tits attractive, or for that matter not be into humans but pop a boner for a well made building..

it is your choice on if you stick it in a mare or a stallion at the end of the day, the other listed things just determine how easy it is to get hard, stay stiff and get to climax.

in b4 not possible to force an orgasm. yes it fucking is, and it is even a fetish.. that said in real life yes you can using estim or even lots of normal means cause one to squirt their load if you know what to do.

so i will say it again.. who cares that they implied a gay couple watch scoots? hell for all you know her mom and dad are around, just have busy careers, and so opened their home to the aunts and asked them to help with their daughter.

>>299752

>One drunken mistake in college does not a bull-dyke make.

We're not talking about bull-dykes, are we? We're talking about women who find other women sexually attractive. Did you actually think that bull-dykes comprise they majority of women who fuck other women?

>That same CDC paper pegs it as 4.4% of women who actually had a female sexual partner in the last year

>in the last year

Sex only counts if it has happened recently, does it? Because surely if a person is attracted to a particular sex then they would constantly be having sex with individuals of that sex.

>I'll just post more horses laughing at your autistic ass.

You may as well just meme, since you have already lost the argument. While you are looking for more smug anime chick pictures, have a look at the new report here >>299750. It actually tallies reported attractions as well as sexual encounters.

>>298086

it is pony for Gods sake… who the fuck cares about politics? they had one gay couple, not a fucking pride parade episode where a bunch of gays accuse rainbow dash of being gay just to get her in the parade and end up referencing the pride float a few years back

>>299754

The difference between "experimented a few times" and "considers themselves gay/lesbian/bi" is a fairly important one.

Its the difference between Vegans and people who occasionally eat vegetarian meals…

Simple fact is that very few people consider themselves actually part of the LGBT and all the other made up numbers. While the last article I linked was about why many people seem to think there are far more of those around. Maybe you should read it? It seems you could learn something from it. Especially since the LGBT crowd and their sympathisers in the media has an ongoing agenda about inflating the reported number of LGBT's to help justify their political agenda and make them look less like a statistical aberration and more like a large segment of society. Something that is a complete load of shit.

You do have one point. Furries do have a conspicuously high population of LGBTandalltheothersnowflakes. That does not mean the rest of society does though. It only highlights how deranged and degenerate the furry community is.

>>299755

You think it won't happen? This small reference in some shitty book is just testing the waters. The faggots who are in charge of the show would fucking LOVE to put in as much faggotry in the show as possible, because that's who they are. They don't see it as harmful, because they've been brainwashed. They see it as doing good. Just look at the twitter screencap thread of the writers and voice artists for this show.

They all voted for Hillary, hate Trump, and they would love nothing more than to pozz the entire show up. They crave it.

Think ahead! Don't just think about right now, think next year, and the year after that. Think like a European, not an African. You nigger.

>>299764

>Only a fraction of people report homosexual tendencies but I magically know what the majority of people want because I'm a master projector

Fuck off lad

>>299768

Learn to read.

>>299767

About fucking time we got some porn.

>>299773

JUST- It was made here.

>>299145

>>299768

That's exactly what you said.

>identity is nothing more than what people say about themselves

I bet you think there isn't any biological difference between genders either. Its only what you choose think you are that matters, right?

Identity isn't just "what you say about yourself", its what you think you are, how you try to be seen by others, how you expect others to treat you and so on.

The concept is large, abstract and essentially impossible to boil down for any practical purposes. Thus the only practical way to determine who is or is not "gay" is to ask who identifies themselves AS gay, instead of trying to find some convoluted way to rate the gayness percentage of people in the way the Kinsey does it. All you are doing is tying to inflate the numbers by trying to find more ways to classify others as gay.

The problem is that you seem to assume that there must be far more gays and lesbians around than there actually are, and are looking for data to support this in surveys that rely on fuzzy definitions to skew their results. This is exactly the kind of shit the Gallup articles you clearly didn't bother reading is about. That most americans think that upwards of 25% of the country's population are gay despite all evidence to the contrary. This isn't an uncommon misconception you are suffering from, but that does not make it correct.

>>299777

I'm not the guy you were responding to.

>I bet

>It's what you think

>You are suffering from

>Pseudo science and random "statistics"

You are retarded.

>>299779

You are correct, that was meant for the guy who keeps changing ID, mea culpa.

I can't help you with your inability to form coherent arguments though.

>>299776

Sometimes you just gotta do shit yourself. Good on the drawfag.

>>299777

>I bet you think there isn't any biological difference between genders either.

Goddamnit, I thought that you were keeping up with the conversation. Your chromosomes, your genitals, and the number of ribs in your sides are a physical reality. You can call that "gender," you can call that "sex," or you can call it a purple banana. It doesn't matter. Whatever you call it, it is a different thing entirely than a sexual identity, which is just made up shit.

>Its only what you choose think you are that matters, right?

Fuck no! That doesn't mean jack shit. People choose to believe that they are all kinds of silly nonsense, none of which has any basis in physical reality.

>what you think you are, how you try to be seen by others, how you expect others to treat you and so on.

Right… imaginary shit that you say about yourself.

>The concept is large, abstract and essentially impossible to boil down for any practical purposes.

That is because it is an ill-defined concept, and thus, like all other concepts without any coherent definition, it is entirely useless as a basis for analysis.

>Thus the only practical way to determine who is or is not "gay" is to ask who identifies themselves AS gay

Or… you could determine who is gay based on whether or not they get sexually excited by individuals of the same sex. Because you can actually do that. You don't even have to monitor their gladular activity. People will usually tell you if you ask, like they told the CDC. If you do it that way ill-defined terms like "gay" suddenly have concrete meanings that signify actual physical realities, which means that they can be used scientifically.

>surveys that rely on fuzzy definitions

The definitions when they are used are clear-cut in the CDC survey. It's your shit that is using ill-defined terms that are "large, abstract and essentially impossible to boil down for any practical purposes."

>>299784

Except one sexual interaction, years ago does not mean you are still sexually aroused by the same sex.

Hell, sexual arousal isn't a single thing either. Its a physiological response that can be provked against your will. Many women get orgasm during rape, don't mean they want to get raped, like wise, men can get erections from rubbing their crotches against tables, does that mean they have a fetish for tables?

You are also going to get a lot of different responses when people have to judge on a scale if they are aroused or not by something. Even if you pose it as a "yes/no" question, since the experience is subjective.

And what about people who never act on any impulses they have?

The CDC's definitions go extremely wide in order to lump as many as they can into gay, though most of those people likely don't consider themselves gay and for good fucking reason.

This is classic statistics twisting. It proves nothing more than you being anal retentive in order to be right in an internet argument since the facts don't fit your argument.

The reason your CDC surveys find more gays in society than other surveys, is because they use a wider definition of "gay" that includes a lot of people who would otherwise not be considered gay in any way. This does not prove normalcy, only your bias to wanting there to be more gays affecting the results of your search.

>>299787

>Except one sexual interaction, years ago does not mean you are still sexually aroused by the same sex.

Which is why that is not the conclusion of the study. If you want to test changes in arousal patterns of specific subjects over time, then you really do have to record the glandular activity of thousands of subjects in response to numerous stimuli. For something more practical–though less accurate–you can just ask people what turns them on, like the CDC did, but you are going to get a figure that is skewed both by subject dishonesty and confusion.

>Hell, sexual arousal isn't a single thing either.

>Its a physiological response that can be provked against your will.

You actually just described it as a single thing, which in fact it is. What you are aroused by is not dependent in any way upon what you want to be aroused by.

>And what about people who never act on any impulses they have?

What about them? What does action have to do with arousal beyond the simple fact that a person who is aroused by something can be safely assumed to be significantly more likely to try to fuck it?

>The CDC's definitions go extremely wide in order to lump as many as they can into gay

No, it doesn't. That's just your paranoia about the jewish cultural marxist governmental conspiracy making you read narratives that are not there. The CDC did not even attempt to define "gay." What they did was use clearly defined terms for data that they gathered. We are defining "gay" right here. You have taken the position that "gay" is an immaterial, undefinable identity that you must personally claim in order to be such. I have taken the position that "gay" is a biological reality determined by a physiological state of arousal when a given individual is exposed to certain stimuli, because doing so makes the term both clearly defined and scientifically useful.

>those people likely don't consider themselves gay and for good fucking reason.

Fucking exactly! What you actually get turned on by is not the same thing as an identity, which is not really anything of substance anyway.

>This does not prove normalcy

"Normalcy?" What the fuck is "normal" but an abstraction that describes nothing in particular? The reality is that last year 19% of women subjects reported being aroused by other women.

>>299791

How fitting that you post Retard Horse while claiming that reason is a forced narrative.

>>299794

>What they did was use clearly defined terms for data that they gathered.

And you used this data to define gay as a larger group than the data gathered in another survey that was using different parameters to prove the world is different.

Do you even read what you write?

The definition of gay you are trying to push is far more vague in order to fit far more people so that you can "prove" that there must be far more gays around.

But reality is that there's barely any of them around. I'm sorry you are sexually confused about your dad but your projecting isn't changing anything. You can argue that anything over 1 on the kinsey scale is gay all you want, but that won't change reality.

For the record, since you seem to have trouble with reading comprehension, my definition of gay is whoever identifies themselves as gay, since trying to tell other people what goes on in their heads is just a futile effort, you won't convince them and its just plain arrogant to assume you know someone else better than they know themselves.

If you insist on being that arrogant ass though, please do it somewhere else, you are getting tiresome and boring.

>>299795

>Do you even read what you write?

Did you? You spend so much time railing against shit that I didn't write while making claims that are the exact same thing that I claimed that I am not convinced that you have any idea what I wrote.

>The definition of gay you are trying to push is far more vague

No it's fucking not. It's clear and simple. You are gay if you are sexually attracted to the same sex. It's your shit that can't be defined, which you flat-out said earlier.

>For the record, since you seem to have trouble with reading comprehension, my definition of gay is whoever identifies themselves as gay

That's what I said right here: 'You have taken the position that "gay" is an immaterial, undefinable identity that you must personally claim in order to be such.' How did you manage to get anything else out of that? Is English not your first language?

>trying to tell other people what goes on in their heads is just a futile effort

Defining something is not about convincing people that their imaginary shit isn't real. It's about establishing a clear, practical concept.

>If you insist on being that arrogant ass though, please do it somewhere else

It is difficult not to be arrogant when the people that I am dealing with insist upon being spectacularly stupid.

>>299807

>It's clear and simple.

<I choose to define gay as anyone who has an abstract and heavily interpreted response that will differ from individual to individual based on their personal experiences so that I can tell them what I think they are and consider this a scientific conclusion.

>I will ask a person if they consider themselves as part of an social group.

Which of these methods do you think will give you a more accurate of how many people are part of said group?

And yet you insist going into freudian "is this a cigar or are you unconsciously thinking of sucking a dick when you smoke" levels of abstract pseudoscientific bullshit to justify your statistical conclusions in the face of reality.

And you still can't seem to wrap the head around the basis of your cognitive bias.

YOU ARE USING A VAGUE DEFINITION OF GAY THAT INCLUDES FAR MORE PEOPLE IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY YOUR BULLSHIT.

You are using the same logic that justifies the kinsey scale you fucking retard.

>>297522

>>297522

This will have the same effect as when Seth Macfarlain killed Brian off in Family guy. That pretty much killed the series for most fans, this will do the same to most ponyfags.

>>299808

>I choose to define gay as anyone who has an abstract and heavily interpreted

>abstract

>heavily interpreted

No. Arousal is a physical reality. It is not some imaginary nonsense like your "gender identity" bullshit is.

>And yet you insist going into freudian

No, dumb shit, that's you. I am talking about chemical reactions while you are talking about imaginary shit.

>YOU ARE USING A VAGUE DEFINITION OF GAY

There is nothing vague about "You are gay if you are sexually attracted to the same sex." Give it up, faggot.

>>299866

It is an emotional response as well as a purely physical, and one primarily dependent on personal experience rather than pure instinct. Hence why most people develop fetishes, many of which give no stimulus to other people. Fetishes like the attraction to your own sex.

If sexual attraction was a purely physical thing, every single human being would have the same preferences.

Sexual preferences like all human perception and experiences are entirely subjective. All you are looking as is the physiological response to it, not the attraction itself and then you try to force the facts to fit the conclusion you want.

You never tried to explain WHY they are attracted to one thing and not another, you just talk about the physical reaction to it.

But do you honestly think the CDC gave brainscans to all the people in their study while showing them porn to determine their responses?

Of course not.

They just asked people about their experiences, and got back replies based, not of peoples physiological responses, but their personal experiences.

Yet, your conclusions are based on knowledge about their physical responses that the study simply never covered, all to justify ignoring the personal experiences of the people in the study.

Its simple. You are trying to force a different concept of "gay" than what the rest of society uses, to justify your fears of "gays everywhere".

>>299873

>If sexual attraction was a purely physical thing, every single human being would have the same preferences.

That makes no sense. Every individual is physically different, not exact copies of a perfect machine.

>Sexual preferences like all human perception and experiences are entirely subjective.

Sexual "preference" maybe, but sexual attraction is not perception. It is a physiological response to stimuli. Don't fall for the fallacious claim that everything we experience is just language.

>You never tried to explain WHY they are attracted to one thing and not another, you just talk about the physical reaction to it.

That is because "why" is not the question at hand. Why a person is attracted to something has no bearing on the question of whether or not they are attracted to that thing. If you want to get into the question of why and you are going to claim, as many do, that gay people are gay merely because they perceive themselves as gay, then I would counter that they would not perceive themselves as gay were it not for their physiological reactions to individuals of the same sex. Basically, they would not think that they were gay if dicks didn't turn them on. The attraction is prior to the adoption of the identity.

>They just asked people about their experiences, and got back replies based, not of peoples physiological responses, but their personal experiences.

Base sophistry. The fact that they relied on subjects to disclose their attractions rather than hooking them up to machines and monitoring them does not make those attractions any less physical in nature. All it does is give less acurate results.

>Yet, your conclusions are based on knowledge about their physical responses

Bullshit. My conclusion is that "gay" is best defined by a simple biological reality (one which is common), and the studies do indeed demonstrate that physical attraction, as reported by the subjects, is primary to preference.

>all to justify ignoring the personal experiences of the people in the study.

The fuck are you talking about? What "personal experiences?" The only thing that they provided was raw data.

>You are trying to force a different concept of "gay" than what the rest of society uses, to justify your fears of "gays everywhere".

Oh my god, I thought that you were some kekistani guy, but you are actually a liberal who took a gender class or two. In my defense, your philosophies are identical; it's just the identities that you like and dislike that are reversed.

>>299887

>I give up trying to reason with you.

Just now you're learning? Well, okay.

Retards are retarded, gays are hella gay. Move on, let xir rot in the bed xir made for xirself.

>>297522

Degeneracy hehrheheheheh

You nigaz are watching a girls show about ponies and jercking to horses. Why don't you want some lesbian horses? It's way better than the lame straight ships like rainbow-soarin.

>>304954

If she is being raised by her aunt then she is an orphan unless her parents are in prison or something.

>>304999

>no archive link

fake news

>>297522

Of course if a girl is masculine in any way she MUST be gay. Pretty ironic they are proving she's overcompensating for a lack of father figure.

Why do the writers keep sticking their feet in their mouths?

>>297617

Hey being,

>autistic

>fucking animals

>dyke

>hyper autistic

>ROASTIE

is normal

>>297972

>Dan

rip

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3bwqks

Here's why this is shitty.

The whole series, the staff has been dropping memebait that Scootaloo's home situation is shitty. We've never seen her legal guardians, and never seen her fly. In the episode where she gets made fun of for being a cripple, we see that she lives in a depressing barracks room. In the episode with Rainbow Dash's parents, she announces that she's incredibly jealous of Dash for having a family that actually gives a shit about her. Up til now, Scootaloo's home situation being bad has been on the same level of canon as Applejack's parents being dead, which is to say that the show would never outright say so, but hints have been and will be dropped and the character has been developed with that in mind.

Imagine if Applejack's parents suddenly showed up and they were full-blown communists trying to overthrow the Princess and Applejack went along with them. That's sort of what's going on here. Scootaloo has gone from living in a troubled home to having super amazing and perfect dyke parents, and everything that's been shown or said about Scootaloo's home life up til now somehow no longer exists. It's not even like they show up and fix everything; the new canon is that they've always been there, which makes no sense with the show as it is.

But I guess it's okay because politics are more important than consistent storytelling or something. Good job you fucking hacks.

>>297979

>How far should I watch after season 5, if anything?

You can skip season six except for s6e1+e2, e5, e6, e7, e16, and e25+26 and you won't miss anything storywise. The few s6 episodes that are actually good are e6, e8, e9, e11, e20, e23, and e25+26. For the most part s6 was really fucking boring.

Season seven is mostly good. Almost every episode can be described as "way better than anything with that summary has a right to be". The s7 eps to avoid are e3, e5, and e8. If you nothing else from s7 you you should definitely watch e13 and e16. e25+26 is good for lore but turned out a little bit underwhelming.

>>304999

Slippery slope is definitively a logical fallacy.

http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/rgass/fallacy3211.htm

>>305090

Fuck normal. I want to fuck horses.

>>305094

>having super amazing and perfect dyke parents

That has not happened. If she lives with her aunt, there must be a reason. Either her parents are dead, or they are unfit. If Scootaloo has unfit parents, that would make sense of everything.

>>305095

Yeah, Season Seven was good until about the half-way point. Then it got stupid.

>>305111

The quality cutoff was literally the hiatus

>>305168

It's like Larson has been cursed to make awful shit since "Magical Mystery Cure." It's so weird, because he was awesome before. Come to think of it, it's the same thing that happened to McCarthy. For the first two years she was absolutely fantastic. Then "A Canterlot Wedding" happened, and it was shit from there on out. Maybe it corresponds with getting an executive job. Suits suck the soul out of an artist.

>>305171

>Maybe it corresponds with getting an executive job

McCarthy was always a follower and not a leader. She's fine on a leash but she's not been trained to call the shots.

>>297628

>muh leftypol

>>305171 It's executives asserting control. They -have- to stick thier dicks in the pudding, because they cannot be seen, among themselves or their lessers, as not being in control.

Seems like yesterday they were censoring gayness in cartoons

>>305243

They're making up for lost time.

THIS IS WHY WE NEED ALTBRONY:

https://twitter.com/mktoon/status/919305620703940608

>>305222

Don't make me post the webm, leftypol.

>>297647

How is the butterthigh one ghey?

>>297766

No, it's definitely (((foreigners)))

>>305368

Speak for yourself, faggot. I'd ride Aunt Holiday all day, any day.

>>305376

>wanting fanfic tier shit in the show

the cartoon is already bad as it is.

>>305407

At this point I'd take a few fanfics over the canon storylines

>>305409

I would have taken a few fanfics over canon storylines even back when the canon storylines were good.

>>305407

Have you seen the new Season Eight characters? Scootaloo's gay aunts look spectacularly normal by comparison.

>>305376

>overweight

>too old

>social justice cutie mark

Have fun with those rape allegations bud.

>>305456

>social justice cutie mark

Lay off the mescaline.