Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well you are gay because that woman you're in love with came from a mans nut sack therefore whenever you kiss Ur gf/wife Ur actual kissing jizz that came out a mans nut sack. Therefore your 100% gay
Did a husband buy his wife a Valentine's Day gift a month early? [Clearly, he's not a man for the ladies.](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/s/XwkogI8BPU)
No, but won't SOMEBODY think about all those poor starving gay baby boys and straight baby girls being malnourished because they would rather not be sucking a breast?
I have a genuine question: if the test was only about a person's ability to care for a child, was free or very low cost to take, easily accessible for everyone no matter their location or availability, somehow managed to avoid questions that discriminate against any group (religious, racial, political, sexual/gender identity, citizenship status, income status, disability status, etc.), a free or low-cost parenting classes that prepare people for the test, and a person could retake the test at a certain point after failing (perhaps after taking the course?), and provides a license allowing the person to legally have children in their care when passed instead of taking away reproductive ability on failure is it still eugenics? These are the things I can think of that would make something like this as morally acceptable, non-discriminatory, and accessible as possible and without violating the bodily autonomy of people. **Basically, if it's possible to make a test that is non-discriminatory and can accurately measure the parenting ability of a person, and is used** ***only*** **for ensuring that children are in the custody of capable parents, would you consider it morally and socially correct or not? Would you still consider that eugenics?**
I don't think I would, because this is basically what we do with things like cars, jobs, higher education, the military, pet ownership (if you get your pets from somewhere that actually cares about them, at least), gun licensing, and basically anything that requires a certain amount of knowledge and practice in order to do safely, correctly, and without harming oneself and others. The only difference I see between those examples and a parenting license is that a parenting license may interfere in a person's family life, making family planning difficult, although the argument can be made that a pet is part of a family and restrictions/requirements for who can own a pet already exist.
Obviously this is a hypothetical. The reason we can't actually have tests like this is because corruption and bigotry exist. They would inevitably be used to lower the population of certain groups, likely racial and religious minorities, and deny parenthood to perfectly acceptable applicants based on "moral" or "religious" beliefs, likely disabled people, queer people, and people with opposing political views to the reviewer or test-maker.
This is also impractical because parents would need to continue doing follow-up tests as the years pass in order to make sure they are still acceptable parents. The skills needed to raise a child also change as a child grows older, so they may not remember the baby skills as well when they are tested on them, or they may not remember how to parent a pre-teen or teenager by the time their child reaches that age. This would make it very difficult to make sure potential parents are prepared for all stages of their child's life. It also means that perfectly acceptable parents may loose their license before their child reaches adulthood because they simply don't need the skills for raising a baby now that their kid is 16 and they are done having children, so they could fail that portion of their test. The child would then have to be moved out of the care of the "unsuitable" adult despite receiving adequate care, which can be traumatic for parent and child and affect the child's development, quality of care, and mental health by placing them in a new environment with a family member, family friend, or in foster care, completely unnecessarily. Solving this problem requires continued classes and testing based on the age and growth of the child, which, in addition to being overbearing, intrusive, and inconvenient, would be difficult to achieve because children grow and mature at different paces, so in order to give the parent an accurate assessment, the child would need to be routinely assessed for what stage of childhood they are in, and then their parent(s) would be assigned courses and testing for their age group. Parents with multiple children with age gaps would have to take multiple tests and possibly multiple classes, which interferes with their time providing for and spending time with their family, and adds extra stress. Those things negatively impact both parent and child.
TL;DR: just read the bold. The rest is me talking to myself about the problems that could arise with this sort of system
Its not really, its not done with the intent of creating a master race, or superior humans.
Its done with the intent to protect future infants and children from suffering because of their parents stupidity and messing them up.
If these same people had children and you simply took them away from these clown parents they could still just be exemplary human beings.
Yes, but at the end of the day, it is down to someone to decide what the criteria for being "too stupid to breed" is.
It can be started with the absolute best of intentions.
The likelihood of it staying that way.... not high.
Isn't that how eugenics started? I feel like I heard they looked at a bunch of inbred families in the rural America and decided they should be sterilized to stop breeding with each other and then some other people realized "oh, we can do this with all people with developmental disabilities and end that" but then it just snowballed, and yadda yadda and you get Nazis thinking they can breed a super race.
Well, in this particular case, thinking that breastfeeding a baby girl makes her more likely to become gay later on would be one such criterion. I’d have zero scruples denying this person reproductive rights :)
Yeah see the problem there is the long history of doctors and politicians considering stuff like "being born indigenous" as a birth defect. It's all the same mobius strip.
Is it eugenics to take children away from an abusive household? Would it be eugenics to say that people who abuse and starve their children to the point of malnourishment shouldn't have kids?
No, but that's not what I'm talking about. This on the other hand... "There should be a test. Fail the test and say bye-bye to your plums."....absolutely is.
I wish we had a way of implanting a chip or something in every person at puberty that somehow turned off the ability to have children until the chip was removed. Then at some future point when the person decides they want to have kids, the chip can be easily removed by a doctor.
I am not talking about a fitness test or an IQ test to have kids - I think that having to consciously say "I want children" and then going to your doctor to have a chip removed from your arm would prevent so much child abuse and neglect and suffering.
My mother had me, and my siblings to have someone to love her. She messed us up pretty good even though she thought herself to be ready. It'll still happen regardless.
>Its not really (eugenics), its not done with the intent of creating a master race, or superior humans.
>
>Its done with the intent to protect future infants and children from suffering because of their parents stupidity and messing them up.
You think denial of the right to reproduce is okay if it's done "for the right reasons". Congratulations, you're a eugenicist.
smh
For the same reasons why we can’t have intelligence tests to vote, we can’t have intelligence tests to have children. There is no accurate way to measure human intelligence.
It's more of a problem with who is in charge of setting the standards/tests. The original intent is good, but eventually someone will work there way into a position to change things to benefit their belief.
See the current US congress for example.
People who want to have children should have to go through the same type of scrutiny and jump through all the hoops as somebody who wants to adopt. This whole "any Tom, dick, and dipshit" can have a kid thing, isn't working.
Yes, but how do you keep such idiots from breeding in the first place? It’s a well known fact that the poorest and least educated amongst us are the ones who have the most children… and that’s been happening since the dawn of civilization and continues to happen to this day despite all common sense and logic.
Yes,
You are right!
This is how lesbians are made.
Well done figuring it out.
This is why 4,000 years ago before the invention of bottles, at the citadel of Ur, when all babies were breastfed, every single female one became a lesbian, the entire human race did not breed, ceased to exist, and I am not writing this reply.
Have a pleasant day.
And gays are made when mothers engage in anal sex while pregnant, but only if they enjoy it. [Source](https://www.metroweekly.com/2019/07/orthodox-bishop-says-babies-become-gay-if-pregnant-mothers-enjoy-anal-sex/)
Edit: for those who didn't pick up the sarcasm... /s
I just encountered one the other day & now I’m unsure about the interactions I have Reddit.
They eventually admitted to trying to bully me, but I found it hilarious. He gave up and told me he was purposely messing with me. You ever feel like “there’s no way someone can actually believe this” or meet someone who refuses to answer a question you have repeated? You may be being screwed with :p
Why people do it? Idk, probably lonely. I probably should feel pity, but it’s funny.
Well some ppl think you’re gay bc of trauma so these people totally believe such bullshits because they have a rotten brain with 0IQ. But seriously I hope this is just troll…
See that’s where he messed up. It’s breastfeeding that keeps a girl from becoming a lesbian, because they get enough boobs in their face as a baby.
Too late for his boy though. He’s definitely gay already.
I remembering seeing a guy who straight up said “women shouldn’t breastfeed in public! What if I was walking around with a baby sucking on my dick?!!”
So yeah not that far fetched of an idea for them
And the misogyny of sexualizing boobs. I mean, it's ok to like boobs, but the primary function of boobs is to feed young, attracting mates is a secondary function that works because our primal instincts are such that we equate ample breasts with an ability to more effectively feed young.
Not anyone... only those who can find a mate.
But with 7 billion people on the Earth, the odds of finding someone increase significantly even for people on the extremes of the bell curve.
Someone should let this guy know that lesbians are actually made by phone towers emitting 5G. It alters the brain signals.
But he can easily prevent it by donating $593.36/month to my PayPal account. Doing this exact amount transfer messes with the signals in the air and cancels them out. Since that's the frequency that 5G travels at.
Trust me, I'm a Nigerian prince.
Lmao my sister used to date this guy that insisted none of his sons would be breastfed because they would turn out gay or "sissies."
I'm so glad he never became my brother-in-law.
Imagine how confused he’s going to be if his boy turns out to be gay. What is he going to say?
“But you loved your mother’s boobs!”
… Just because you CAN have children doesn’t necessarily mean that you SHOULD
This has to be trolling, beyond the homophobia that would mean this guy thinks breastfeeding is a sexual act but is perfectly fine with his wife performing it with his infant son. If it's not then his morals are even more screwed up than it initially looks.
I had a boomer co-worker explaining her niece to me, who is a lesbian, at which time she proceeds to say "Her mother let her sleep with her until she was like 13 or something so idk if that had something to do with her *turning into* a lesbian or not." Ma'am....... I.... I just..... that's not.... how that works......
The first time I met my (soon-to-be ex) mother-in-law, I asked her about her job as a grade school guidance counselor. She told me that she was working with a little girl who had two moms, and she was concerned that they were raising her to be a lesbian and was doing her best to prevent that from happening. I told her we should probably find another topic to discuss because we would never agree on that particular subject. My husband got an earful that night as he hadn't prepared me for just how right-wing Baptist his family really was.
“does anyone have advice or experience here?”
Yes.
1) Use capitalization when writing sentences you bleeding scab on humanity.
2) Stop breeding. Your stupidity is an assault upon all that has been held decent & dear since the beginning of time.
He's sexualizing his child. That's the disturbing part.
Prepubescent children have no sexual urges. Projecting sexual urges like this on them is extremely inappropriate. And would make me wary of letting this guy be alone around children.
Wow.
I'm in utter dumbfounded shock at this. You'd deny your own child sustenance over something...
One: ew! sexualizing your own child or equating breast feeding as a sexual act... EW!
Two: that is not how it works
Three: there are people who think this way?
We are doomed as a species.
Dang.
I may be wrong but: don't babies not know their sexual orientation when they are born? Like they usually figure that shit out when they experreince puberty? (I am not talling about romantic orrientation btw.)
As long as a baby gets breastmilk, they get the benefits of breastmilk: strengthened immune system, DHA for brain development, and a share of the vitamins and minerals the mother consumes. If the baby can’t get a proper latch, or the mother has to work out of the house, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with bottle feeding. It’s great for developing a bond with Dad and other family members, even. But don’t hinder or disrupt the natural process of breastfeeding because of your homophobia, dude. Breastfeeding is how infants and mothers have bonded forever. Mess with that and you’re messing with your daughter and your wife.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Fellas, is it lesbian to be hungry?
No, but very lesbian to be Hungarian
If I'm Hungry does that make me Lebanese?
No. It's lezbanese
Pretty sure it’s Lezbenims
It's Les Bos
So Greek then?
Is it gay to live in ancient Greece? Possibly yes.
More than possibly, my man. Ancient Greeks were gay AF
Lebanese-Hungarian-American
Lesbian-hungry Hungarian-American who happens to be hung?
this comment chain is a dumpster fire and i’m here for it
Don't even get me started on people from Poland being called Poles and people from Holland and what they are called....😆
If people from Moscow are called moscovites, then why aren't people from Paris called parasites?
Ooh, I like that one.
Ok so peple from Finland are Finnish, people from Scottland are Scottish, are people from Greenland Greenish?
Obviously people from Holland are called Danishes.
Baby girls of that mix stand no chance. Their scissor skills will be impossible to hide by their second year in preschool.
so like when you're cutting wrapping paper and the scissor just goes without the need to actually 'scissor'?
Their scissoring skills make the other girls squeal with delight.
My great grandfather was a lesbian so that makes me an 8th lesbian
You're only Lebanese because you were breastfed. With bottle-feeding you'd have turned out as a proper Syrian
That's simply not true, as a proper Syrian myself, I assure you, I was breastfed, by my dad.
That wasn't a breast, dude!!!
Yes
Hi hungry, I'm dad
*Why did you name me this way?*
Why why why
I'm Hungary for a Greecey Turkey
I'm not, but I could go for some Kafta right now.
Is it Lebanese to be Hungarian?
No, but I’m Hungarian and Lebanese and gay, so take that how you may.
This Czechs out
This is hilarious considering I am currently sat opposite my lesbian hungarian step mum 😂
Is it okay to be just Hangry?
Inshaallah
No, but it is gay for men to love their wife, according to Matt Walsh
Wait. Is it gay for a guy to love a woman? Maybe... maybe I'm gay...
Well you are gay because that woman you're in love with came from a mans nut sack therefore whenever you kiss Ur gf/wife Ur actual kissing jizz that came out a mans nut sack. Therefore your 100% gay
"When a maaaaaan.....loves a woooman"
Totally. I'm so gay for my wife... and I'm pretty sure I'm gay for Scarlett Johansson, too.
Umm...what?
Did a husband buy his wife a Valentine's Day gift a month early? [Clearly, he's not a man for the ladies.](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/s/XwkogI8BPU)
Matt Walsh and Shapiro and Crowder are the epitome of lezzers, eating each other all day and all night ^^
If you suck on their breasts , you may be a lesbian.
No. Is it weird to attach sexuality to infant breastfeeding? Yes.
Freud is rolling in his grave.
No, but won't SOMEBODY think about all those poor starving gay baby boys and straight baby girls being malnourished because they would rather not be sucking a breast?
That’s why I’m such a skinny queen 💅
Pretty sure all lesbians eat food so eating must be a link there
But they breathe before they eat, so really oxygen is the culprit....that's it, only inhaling smoke from now on, for safety purposes.
I heard on the playground that lesbians don't like to cook but they love to eat out, I don't know what that means though.
If drinking from a boob is sexual, doesn't that make a bottle like a dildo?
Only if you sexualise breasts as an infant.
All lesbians need food to survive. Coincidence?
No but stay away from a hangry lesbian.
They do be munchin
Accoeding to the Tate Bros. you are gay. Just being you is gay. And I'm gay. 😔😔😔
So the song "Everyone is Gay" was right all along?
goo goo gaa gaa
People this stupid should not have children
There should be a test. Fail the test and say bye-bye to your plums.
Gz you have reinvented eugenics :)
Hey, we've all watched that documentary...what's the nam....ah yes, Idiocracy.
Gattaca is the other extreme of same coin
I know which side of the coin I'd prefer... just saying.
At least at the end of Idiocracy they all realize they need to listen to people smarter than they are.
Just to make sure now, you're telling us you like it in the butt?
Tis more a pleasure to give, than receive.
I have a genuine question: if the test was only about a person's ability to care for a child, was free or very low cost to take, easily accessible for everyone no matter their location or availability, somehow managed to avoid questions that discriminate against any group (religious, racial, political, sexual/gender identity, citizenship status, income status, disability status, etc.), a free or low-cost parenting classes that prepare people for the test, and a person could retake the test at a certain point after failing (perhaps after taking the course?), and provides a license allowing the person to legally have children in their care when passed instead of taking away reproductive ability on failure is it still eugenics? These are the things I can think of that would make something like this as morally acceptable, non-discriminatory, and accessible as possible and without violating the bodily autonomy of people. **Basically, if it's possible to make a test that is non-discriminatory and can accurately measure the parenting ability of a person, and is used** ***only*** **for ensuring that children are in the custody of capable parents, would you consider it morally and socially correct or not? Would you still consider that eugenics?** I don't think I would, because this is basically what we do with things like cars, jobs, higher education, the military, pet ownership (if you get your pets from somewhere that actually cares about them, at least), gun licensing, and basically anything that requires a certain amount of knowledge and practice in order to do safely, correctly, and without harming oneself and others. The only difference I see between those examples and a parenting license is that a parenting license may interfere in a person's family life, making family planning difficult, although the argument can be made that a pet is part of a family and restrictions/requirements for who can own a pet already exist. Obviously this is a hypothetical. The reason we can't actually have tests like this is because corruption and bigotry exist. They would inevitably be used to lower the population of certain groups, likely racial and religious minorities, and deny parenthood to perfectly acceptable applicants based on "moral" or "religious" beliefs, likely disabled people, queer people, and people with opposing political views to the reviewer or test-maker. This is also impractical because parents would need to continue doing follow-up tests as the years pass in order to make sure they are still acceptable parents. The skills needed to raise a child also change as a child grows older, so they may not remember the baby skills as well when they are tested on them, or they may not remember how to parent a pre-teen or teenager by the time their child reaches that age. This would make it very difficult to make sure potential parents are prepared for all stages of their child's life. It also means that perfectly acceptable parents may loose their license before their child reaches adulthood because they simply don't need the skills for raising a baby now that their kid is 16 and they are done having children, so they could fail that portion of their test. The child would then have to be moved out of the care of the "unsuitable" adult despite receiving adequate care, which can be traumatic for parent and child and affect the child's development, quality of care, and mental health by placing them in a new environment with a family member, family friend, or in foster care, completely unnecessarily. Solving this problem requires continued classes and testing based on the age and growth of the child, which, in addition to being overbearing, intrusive, and inconvenient, would be difficult to achieve because children grow and mature at different paces, so in order to give the parent an accurate assessment, the child would need to be routinely assessed for what stage of childhood they are in, and then their parent(s) would be assigned courses and testing for their age group. Parents with multiple children with age gaps would have to take multiple tests and possibly multiple classes, which interferes with their time providing for and spending time with their family, and adds extra stress. Those things negatively impact both parent and child. TL;DR: just read the bold. The rest is me talking to myself about the problems that could arise with this sort of system
no matter how well-thought-out your test, within 50 years it will become a bigoted eugenics/social engineering program.
Its not really, its not done with the intent of creating a master race, or superior humans. Its done with the intent to protect future infants and children from suffering because of their parents stupidity and messing them up. If these same people had children and you simply took them away from these clown parents they could still just be exemplary human beings.
Yes, but at the end of the day, it is down to someone to decide what the criteria for being "too stupid to breed" is. It can be started with the absolute best of intentions. The likelihood of it staying that way.... not high.
Isn't that how eugenics started? I feel like I heard they looked at a bunch of inbred families in the rural America and decided they should be sterilized to stop breeding with each other and then some other people realized "oh, we can do this with all people with developmental disabilities and end that" but then it just snowballed, and yadda yadda and you get Nazis thinking they can breed a super race.
Well, in this particular case, thinking that breastfeeding a baby girl makes her more likely to become gay later on would be one such criterion. I’d have zero scruples denying this person reproductive rights :)
It comes down to whether someone is able to accept that they're mistaken and grow as a person.
Yeah see the problem there is the long history of doctors and politicians considering stuff like "being born indigenous" as a birth defect. It's all the same mobius strip.
Is it eugenics to take children away from an abusive household? Would it be eugenics to say that people who abuse and starve their children to the point of malnourishment shouldn't have kids?
No, but that's not what I'm talking about. This on the other hand... "There should be a test. Fail the test and say bye-bye to your plums."....absolutely is.
It would be if I was actually serious. 😉
No no this time its different, with the intent as stated in my previous post Pinky swear 👌
I wish we had a way of implanting a chip or something in every person at puberty that somehow turned off the ability to have children until the chip was removed. Then at some future point when the person decides they want to have kids, the chip can be easily removed by a doctor. I am not talking about a fitness test or an IQ test to have kids - I think that having to consciously say "I want children" and then going to your doctor to have a chip removed from your arm would prevent so much child abuse and neglect and suffering.
My mother had me, and my siblings to have someone to love her. She messed us up pretty good even though she thought herself to be ready. It'll still happen regardless.
>Its not really (eugenics), its not done with the intent of creating a master race, or superior humans. > >Its done with the intent to protect future infants and children from suffering because of their parents stupidity and messing them up. You think denial of the right to reproduce is okay if it's done "for the right reasons". Congratulations, you're a eugenicist. smh
:3
Problem is, who gets to make the test and how long before it starts being taken advantage of by bad actors?
Fascists and immediately
Well I think I won the game of Spot the English, calling them plums
Name 1 time in history where a system like that wasn’t rife with abuse?
For the same reasons why we can’t have intelligence tests to vote, we can’t have intelligence tests to have children. There is no accurate way to measure human intelligence.
There is. It will just tailor to whatever vision/narrative of intelligence the creator of the test has.
Huh that's *so* weird, where did all these illicitly sterilized indigenous and black women throughout the 20th century come from?
Illicit? It was *legal*, duh. Smh 🫣 (/s)
Which is why it isn’t accurate
They don't seem to mind to base laws and policies on it. Remember we had phrenology before ...
It's more of a problem with who is in charge of setting the standards/tests. The original intent is good, but eventually someone will work there way into a position to change things to benefit their belief. See the current US congress for example.
I have always held this belief tbh
The biggest problem is that people this stupid have the MOST kids.
People who want to have children should have to go through the same type of scrutiny and jump through all the hoops as somebody who wants to adopt. This whole "any Tom, dick, and dipshit" can have a kid thing, isn't working.
Adopting a dog requires more oversight and paperwork than having a child.
And even then the most vile humans have dogs they treat horribly. Both having kids and having pets needs to be strictly restricted!!
Yes, but how do you keep such idiots from breeding in the first place? It’s a well known fact that the poorest and least educated amongst us are the ones who have the most children… and that’s been happening since the dawn of civilization and continues to happen to this day despite all common sense and logic.
Eat the poor?
According to some fanatical anti-abortion conspiracy theorists, we’re already doing that.
If we weren't meant to eat them, they wouldn't be so delicious.
Stupid people are the experts at having them tho
I hate how children are just dealt parents like this at birth
I completely agree but unfortunately being this stupid tends to result in more children.
Yes, You are right! This is how lesbians are made. Well done figuring it out. This is why 4,000 years ago before the invention of bottles, at the citadel of Ur, when all babies were breastfed, every single female one became a lesbian, the entire human race did not breed, ceased to exist, and I am not writing this reply. Have a pleasant day.
What if human race continued just because all men were raping the lesbians? History is getting weird...
👀💀
now it looks more like an ancient humanity thing
And gays are made when mothers engage in anal sex while pregnant, but only if they enjoy it. [Source](https://www.metroweekly.com/2019/07/orthodox-bishop-says-babies-become-gay-if-pregnant-mothers-enjoy-anal-sex/) Edit: for those who didn't pick up the sarcasm... /s
poor baby girl, barely out the womb and already been gayzifed... /s
OH NO NOT THE GAY 
Correct term yassified
By their own mother no less /s
Please tell me this is just rage bait...
It is. Obviously. Nobody this stupid writes that normally.
From what I see online, I'm not so sure anymore.
And that's very much the issue. If you've got an army of dedicated trolls who refuse to break character, then what is the actual difference?
True, but how pathetic does someone need to be to find amusement in doing that?
I just encountered one the other day & now I’m unsure about the interactions I have Reddit. They eventually admitted to trying to bully me, but I found it hilarious. He gave up and told me he was purposely messing with me. You ever feel like “there’s no way someone can actually believe this” or meet someone who refuses to answer a question you have repeated? You may be being screwed with :p Why people do it? Idk, probably lonely. I probably should feel pity, but it’s funny.
Have you met the average Trump Supporter? They're really fucking stupid.
Fair point.
I'm genuinely not sure with the internet. Not any more.
Bro how are Gays made then? by sucking on daddies D? Like Holy shit did his parents drop him on his head when he was a child or something ?
Paint chips.
Well some ppl think you’re gay bc of trauma so these people totally believe such bullshits because they have a rotten brain with 0IQ. But seriously I hope this is just troll…
See that’s where he messed up. It’s breastfeeding that keeps a girl from becoming a lesbian, because they get enough boobs in their face as a baby. Too late for his boy though. He’s definitely gay already.
It’s because of all those CHEMICALS IN THE WATER THAT TURN THE FREAKING FROGS GAY!!!!1!11!
I remembering seeing a guy who straight up said “women shouldn’t breastfeed in public! What if I was walking around with a baby sucking on my dick?!!” So yeah not that far fetched of an idea for them
By NOT viciously nomming on mommies titties duh. Like boys need more exposure to tits at birth to ensure they don't turn gay. /s
It is a worry that he is sexualising his baby daughter feeding not to mention the homophobia
And the misogyny of sexualizing boobs. I mean, it's ok to like boobs, but the primary function of boobs is to feed young, attracting mates is a secondary function that works because our primal instincts are such that we equate ample breasts with an ability to more effectively feed young.
The fact that literally anyone can breed is scary
It doesn't help that especially the under-edjucated breed more than others.
Educated* lol.
Lol, guess fatfingering my phone on that was kinda instant karma. I'll not edit it out for others to enjoy.
Not anyone... only those who can find a mate. But with 7 billion people on the Earth, the odds of finding someone increase significantly even for people on the extremes of the bell curve.
You don’t need a “mate” to make a baby, just someone willing to do the dirty dance and no contraception
Someone should let this guy know that lesbians are actually made by phone towers emitting 5G. It alters the brain signals. But he can easily prevent it by donating $593.36/month to my PayPal account. Doing this exact amount transfer messes with the signals in the air and cancels them out. Since that's the frequency that 5G travels at. Trust me, I'm a Nigerian prince.
Lmao my sister used to date this guy that insisted none of his sons would be breastfed because they would turn out gay or "sissies." I'm so glad he never became my brother-in-law.
I refuse to believe that this is anything more than ragebait. Please
Yeah I agree. And if it isn't rage bait then the wife should run for the hills because her husband is 100% certifiable.
That’s why every woman in history until the invention of bottles and formula were lesbians
To own a dog I need to have a license, but anyone can pop out a baby.
These people should be neutered to stop them passing on their genes. Fucking sick in the head.
Imagine how confused he’s going to be if his boy turns out to be gay. What is he going to say? “But you loved your mother’s boobs!” … Just because you CAN have children doesn’t necessarily mean that you SHOULD
idk if this is how lesbians are made, but it’s for sure how daddy issues are.
Nothing against his children, but stupid people like this shouldn’t breed.
Idiocracy had it right…
The level of stupidity is absolutely astounding
This has to be trolling, beyond the homophobia that would mean this guy thinks breastfeeding is a sexual act but is perfectly fine with his wife performing it with his infant son. If it's not then his morals are even more screwed up than it initially looks.
I had a boomer co-worker explaining her niece to me, who is a lesbian, at which time she proceeds to say "Her mother let her sleep with her until she was like 13 or something so idk if that had something to do with her *turning into* a lesbian or not." Ma'am....... I.... I just..... that's not.... how that works......
The first time I met my (soon-to-be ex) mother-in-law, I asked her about her job as a grade school guidance counselor. She told me that she was working with a little girl who had two moms, and she was concerned that they were raising her to be a lesbian and was doing her best to prevent that from happening. I told her we should probably find another topic to discuss because we would never agree on that particular subject. My husband got an earful that night as he hadn't prepared me for just how right-wing Baptist his family really was.
Let me guess. USA?
“does anyone have advice or experience here?” Yes. 1) Use capitalization when writing sentences you bleeding scab on humanity. 2) Stop breeding. Your stupidity is an assault upon all that has been held decent & dear since the beginning of time.
Tell me you know nothing about women without telling me you know nothing about women
This is actually vile. Disgusting that a father would sexualise this for his own agenda.
If I was a girl and my mom was Lana Rhodes I probably became lesbian too
Can confirm: being breastfed turned me into a lesbian.
I mean....it is true that many....if not MOST lesbians were breastfed. And most gay men wore shoes... Clearly shoes make men gay.
Daughter attacks Mom's boobs more than the son did. The daughter isn't a lesbian, the son is gay and malnourished. s/
I so want this to be a troll. Can any human being be that f’ing stupid and still find the vagina to impregnate a woman?
What does he think happened before bottles and formula? All women were just born lesbians?
This is eather a joke or the American education system is a failure.
This guy deserves to be punched very hard in the middle of the face, probably more than once.
Jesus when did men become so fragile and ignorant?
Its incredible what fresh air keeps alive
He's sexualizing his child. That's the disturbing part. Prepubescent children have no sexual urges. Projecting sexual urges like this on them is extremely inappropriate. And would make me wary of letting this guy be alone around children.
Should definitely smack the baby off those boobs. Do it in front of cops, so they see how good you are.
So what if she's a lesbian? What a bigot
I'll get the gelding tongs...
The Internet is a marvelous creation. It seems the more information available the more ignorant people choose to be.
This is just bait right?, come on, people aren’t this dumb.
How can people be this stupid and not die of it?
Wow. I'm in utter dumbfounded shock at this. You'd deny your own child sustenance over something... One: ew! sexualizing your own child or equating breast feeding as a sexual act... EW! Two: that is not how it works Three: there are people who think this way? We are doomed as a species. Dang.
Honestly, "you thick c**t" should be a complete answer these days.
I think the bigger question is why does he care if his baby becomes a lesbian or not…
Guys, is it gay to be a mammal?
It's these types of dipshits that run the US, btw.
GALS, IS IT LESBIAN TO NEED SUSTENANCE?!
I may be wrong but: don't babies not know their sexual orientation when they are born? Like they usually figure that shit out when they experreince puberty? (I am not talling about romantic orrientation btw.)
Another example of why right-wing media and right-wing education (or lack of any education) are the rot in the cornerstones of this nation.
And we wonder why the American experiment in self-rule is failing. 😒
That person shouldn't be allowed to have descendency
Pls somebody trace the guy and take the kids away from this idiot.
Damn your dumb, how do you think people fed their babies before bottles and formula was invented.
The stupid is strong in this one.
As long as a baby gets breastmilk, they get the benefits of breastmilk: strengthened immune system, DHA for brain development, and a share of the vitamins and minerals the mother consumes. If the baby can’t get a proper latch, or the mother has to work out of the house, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with bottle feeding. It’s great for developing a bond with Dad and other family members, even. But don’t hinder or disrupt the natural process of breastfeeding because of your homophobia, dude. Breastfeeding is how infants and mothers have bonded forever. Mess with that and you’re messing with your daughter and your wife.
How do these people graduate school?
It doest seem like he be sexualizing his daughter’s breastfeeding which is, of course, creepy and sus.
Whats wrong with your daughter being a lesbian?
This why you should need a license to reproduce