Gay Buttsex - Oh Good Lord NO!

Ah, Yvonne Lee, noted lawyer and lecturer in the National University of Singapore hates butt-sex. No really, she does. The concept of a big (or small) shlong sliding in and out of someone's bunghole really gets in her craw. That is the only explanation I can come up with why she is against homosexuality.

Let me point out that I agree with her totally. I hate buttsex too. The very thought of having a cucumber-sized (or even lima bean sized) body appendage thrust painfully up my nether regions makes me wince. My asshole is made for one-way traffic, not two. Things go out, not in. It is a unidirectional production line in the value chain of life. I rather would die of prostate cancer than have some doctor stick a rubberised glove up my poop-chute, really.

Which is why I have a perfect solution to the problem, not to have buttsex!

Now if only Yvonne Lee would think up that. I mean come on, the woman is a fucking professor in Singapore's premier university. Surely a solution like that is not that complicated?! If she doesn't like butt-sex, she can just choose not to have it.

Instead of which she chooses the ridiculous alternative: Supporting the criminalization of ALL homosexual activity, regardless of whether dongs or or fingers are involved. She is even against the concept of a man holding hands with another man in public.

Yvonne mentioned that It is a known medical fact that homosexual intercourse or sodomy is an inherently unhealthy act that carries higher risks of a number of sexually transmitted infections. The law should not facilitate acts which threaten public health.

Doesn't that mean that ALL forms of buggery should be banned, homosexual or otherwise? Is Yvonne willing to break into the house of the otherwise "well adjusted" civil servant doing the dirty to his wife's poopchute and slap the irons on his errant penis? Is she willing to speak out on the evils of anal violation to groups of teenagers far too willing to experiment with their sexuality? Hell for all she knows, her own kids engage in all sorts of vile sexual activities that include at some point a trip up the chocolate factory anyway. Is she willing to be our moral crusader?

[MINOR DIGRESSION OF SORTS]
You know what, this gives me an idea. Singapore had the Courtesy Lion as a mascot for courtesy, and it's high time we got a new mascot for something. Let us have a mascot banning buttsex! Let's call him (has to be a him, for we know only filthy gays engage in dirty buttsex no?) Bungno! He can be a multireligious, multiracial parrot that speaks out against Butt-piracy! A parrot against piracy, how fucking brilliant is that?! Hell I have even found an image of the fucking mascot here: http://www.anchoragebucs.com/parrotsm.gif (Apparently it belongs to some baseball team but fuck them Yanks, this is a national emergency).

He can use his baseball bat of righteousness to smash up all those filthy butt-sexers. Praise fucking Jesus!

[END OF MINOR DIGRESSION OF SORTS]

Anyway all that aside, I am wondering what really does this woman have against gays. I mean, how does decriminalising something like homosexuality "ignores the nature of Singapore's multireligious, multiracial community." What the fuck has buggering gay sex have to do with race?! I never understood this about the Singaporean elite. why do they ALWAYS have to bring race into any issue? Singapore is not the only fucking multiracial, multireligious city, shithoses. Most cosmopolitan cities are far more multiracial and multireligious than Singapore will ever be.

What the fuck has this to do with religion as well? Hey, Singapore allows gambling, which is against the principles of religion, it allows fucking prostitution to be carried out and even taxes it, and those are fine, but two consenting adult males or females doing the dirty in a seedy motel in Geylang suddenly has her moralising panties in a twist?

Furthermore, she says therefore, the attention given to fundamental moral values of the majority of citizens by retaining S377A (the act criminaling homosexuality) in its entirety strikes the right balance.

What moral values of the majority of citizens? How the fuck does she know what the majority are thinking? What happened to this same majority who opposed the setting up of casinos here? What happened to this same majority who didn't give a rat's dick about the World Bank having its conferences here?

You know for someone who hates anal violation she seems to be enjoying the idea of shitting on herself, as is evident from this paragraph. Warning, the logical fallacies will cause your penises to shrink, your brains to explode and cause you to suddenly want to have sex with Lisa Minelli.

Ready? Here goes: While the law embodies a moral judgment, it is not always prudent for the law to punish all immoral behaviour. However, to draw an analogy between adulterers and homosexuals is fallacious. Adulterers do not seek societal approval, but certain homosexual activists campaign to alter the public mindset and to gain legal and social endorsement of the gay lifestyle.

There.. Don't say I didn't warn you. So certain homosexual activists campaign to gain legal and social endorsement of the gay lifestyle, as she claims. Even IF that was true (although most just want to have hot gay lubed buttplugging in bathtubs in colour co-ordinated bathrooms or something), EVEN IF (Oh what a big if!) that was the "gay agenda", and let us assume it is. I have a four word question. Yeah? And? So? What?!

So WHAT if they seek legal and social endorsement? How does that change anything about the fact that most of us still would rather fuck chicks? How does legal endorsement of their lifestyle change the fact that I still want to do the dirty with the hot babe from CMU I met on the street eight weekends ago? How does decriminalising anal porkage change the fact that most men still would rather fuck pussies, thank you very much? She seems to claim that just because buttsexing between men is legal, suddenly we all would want to do each other's assholes and that is oh so fucking wrong because, well because... oh because it's wrong dammit! Shut up and fuck your wife missionary, like a good Singaporean man should, and produce more kids already!

Or, it's about the children, I hear you say. Well, fuck the children. They are smart enough to know which team they want to play for. Let's give them a bit more credit, shall we? If they are so easily influenced, I have a suggestion. Let's influence them to play with sharp, burning electrical objects as well. Our genepool needs the Chlorox anyway.

According to her professorial world view, adultery should not be criminalised although it often destroys families and ruins lives but two men plugging away at each others' anal orifices is somehow wrong? This woman is a law lecturer in a university, and it is telling about the quality of graduates they produce there. You know I agree with her views on buttsex totally for one more reason. After all, that is where NUS law graduates come from.