Do you ever get that feeling that you’re really arguing for no reason at all? This couple does but it all makes sense in the end. Read the full story
Posted on 30 March 2013.
Do you ever get that feeling that you’re really arguing for no reason at all? This couple does but it all makes sense in the end. Read the full story
Posted on 13 March 2013.
As long-time readers of Glossy News know, I’m a man of exquisite passion. So when I wanted to ratchet up the loving, I did what any man would do. I sipped some whiskey, yelled at my kids, and turned to the wisdom of books.
I didn’t have to look far to find something to fill this void in the parts of my life that so desperately crave the touch of my loving lady. I picked up “How High Should I Jump?” by R. Milton Quibner, HE.R.S, and I got my answers. Read the full story
Posted on 10 February 2013.
[Glossy News contributor, Tim Jones, provides a periodic column for Glossy News called The Love Doctor, where he shares his insights on matters of the heart.]
For years people the world over have sought my advice as a foremost authority on matters of the heart. Perhaps it’s because I’m half-German. Or maybe because I got an A- in French in high school – the language of love. I don’t actually have any formalized training in this arena. And I still don’t quite understand position #27 of the Kama Sutra. Read the full story
Posted on 03 February 2013.
This Sunday is the biggest single day of the year in sports: No, I’m not talking about the Fresno Kennel Club Annual Dog Show taking place this coming Sunday – although granted, that is a very big sporting event. No, I’m talking about this Sunday’s Super Bowl between the Baltimore Ravens and the San Francisco 49ers. I believe it’s Super Bowl MCLXXXXVIIIVX, but I could be off by a couple I’s. Read the full story
Posted on 03 December 2012.
If you’re like my wife, then after you’ve been married for about two years, you probably realize your decision to get married was a serious mistake.
Marriage is difficult, especially if your husband is a humor writer or you have kids. If you do make the mistake of having kids, be sure to get the best warranty coverage possible. Read the full story
Posted on 11 November 2012.
My husband and I attended his brother’s daughter’s wedding. We are the very immediate family. All of my husband’s brothers and sisters (also immediate family) and their spouses were seated at the front of the room at table 1 and 2; however we were assigned seats in the very back of the room.
We were surprised and saddened by their choice to put us there. The whole family is very kind, loving and religious. There are no problems between any of us; we really love all of them. We feel so hurt. Should we address this? If so, is there a polite way to do it? I am lost and so hurt. Read the full story
Posted on 30 October 2012.
Hard to believe? Then maybe you’ll believe a study which concluded that marriages where the women do all the housework while the men retreat to the parlor to smoke cigars, read the newspaper and discuss politics with other men in top hats are happier.
Technically, that study was based on focus groups of landed gentry horse farm owners in Greenwich, CT in 1879. But now a brand new study appears to validate those previous findings. Read the full story
Posted on 29 September 2012.
I’ve been working in the field of Genetics and Bioinformatics for many years now. What I’ve been taught most of my life is that homosexuality is an innate condition that people are born with. The genetics of this is very complicated so I will simplify. For example:
1. SRY (Sex-determining region Y) is a sex-determining gene on the Y chromosome (XX = Female; XY = Male). SRY is a single gene located on the Y chromosome that activates a complex array of male determining genotype and phenotype genes during the process of fertilization, differentiation, and development of an female egg into a baby.
However, during the mixing and cross-over of chromosomes, the SRY gene can be stripped from the Y chromosome and attach itself to the X chromosome. So some XX sex determining chromosome sets to from a woman can produce homosexual characteristics that can result in the birth of a Lesbian. The opposite is true for Gays.
2. Prenatal Hormones. If a lot of Androgen is present in the mother’s womb during the development of nerve cells and the brain, then a female baby can come to form as a Lesbian.
3. Androgen Absorption Resistance. Cells in a baby can be resistant to the absorption of androgen to produce testosterone. Without testosterone in the presence of a baby, the baby can also become homosexual.
Other genetic factors are too complicated to explain here. But take my word for it!
However, an interesting bioinformatics statistic came to my attention today: “Almost all of the homosexual children are born by heterosexual parents. And Almost all of the children raised by homosexual parents are heterosexual children.”
I did some research outside of my field of study on what other factors other than inheriting genes, proteins and hormones that can cause homosexuality. Can homosexuality be a choice or a lifestyle rather than genetics? I came across some literature on this subject today.
In a U.S.-based 1970s mail survey by Shere Hite, lesbians self-reported their reasons for being lesbian. This is the only major piece of research into female sexuality that has looked at how women understand being homosexual since Kinsey in 1953. The research yielded information about women’s general understanding of lesbian relationships and their sexual orientation.
Women talked about social conditioning, which made it “almost impossible for me to have a truly healthy sexual relationship with a man”. Another woman stated that because of their conditioning “women are much more sensitive to other people’s needs”, and so “sex is better with women physically and emotionally”, stating she preferred the symmetries of power and aesthetic between women. Some talked about preferring women.
“Personally, I like girls better, they are more tender and loving”, and some went into how they found that emotional relationships with women were more satisfying than those with men, with women making more creative and versatile lovers. One woman reported it was easier for her “to give myself emotionally to a woman”.
A woman who had been a lesbian for two years said she found that sexual relationships with women were more pleasurable on both psychological and physical levels than with men; this was “because the women I’ve had sex with have been my friends first, which was never the case with men. Being friends sets up a trust that I think is essential for satisfying physical intimacy.
Relating to another woman physically seems to me like the most natural thing in the world. You’ve already got a head start on knowing how to give her pleasure. Gentleness seems to be the key, and is the main difference between relating to men and women.'”
Women talked about women making better sexual partners and that was a dominant theme: “I find women better lovers; they know what a woman wants and most of all, there is an emotional closeness that can never be matched with a man. More tenderness, more consideration and understanding of feelings, etc.” This was because men were perceived as unliberated “sexually or emotionally or any other way”, and lesbianism was perceived “as an alternative to abstinence” and to men generally.
Men were perceived as usually juvenile, while a relationship with women was described as “more of a communion with self”. Sex as well as relationships with women were seen as a way of achieving independence from men; “sex with a woman means independence from men.”
Male sexual performance was another problem, “ten to twenty minutes for a man, at least an hour with a woman, usually more”, as well as attention to the sexual needs of women who themselves “seem to have a more sustained energy level after orgasm, and are more likely to know and do something about it if I’m not satisfied”. One understanding of the difference was that sex with women “is not an ‘exchange’ or a ‘trade’ or services”, and not focused on orgasm, with “more kissing and holding” and “more concern for my pleasure”, which was experienced as liberating.
Sex with women was also seen as a political act; “I see lesbianism as putting all my energies (sexual, political social, etc.) into women. Sex is a form of comfort and to have sex indiscriminately with males is to give them comfort.”.
Hite found the two most significant differences between respondents’ experience with men and women were the focus on clitoral stimulation, and more emotional involvement and orgasmic responses. Since Hite carried out her study she has acknowledged that some women may have chosen the political identity of a lesbian. Julie Bindel, a UK journalist, reaffirmed that “political lesbianism continues to make intrinsic sense because it reinforces the idea that sexuality is a choice, and we are not destined to a particular fate because of our chromosomes.” as recently as 2009.
The study’s senior researcher said that women’s sexual desire is less rigidly directed toward a particular sex, as compared with men’s, and women’s sexuality is more changeable over time. Men lack of knowledge about women’s sexuality. McCormick states that emotional, mental, and ideological connections between women are as important or more so than the genital stimulation. Women generally exhibit greater sexual fluidity than men and find it easier to become physically and emotionally intimate with the same sex than men do.
I also found research in what is considered attractive in women between lesbian couples VS. that of heterosexual couples.
Men’s shaping of women’s sexuality has proven to have an effect on how lesbians see their own bodies. Studies have shown that heterosexual men and lesbians have different standards for what they consider attractive in women. Lesbians who view themselves with male standards of female beauty may experience lower self-esteem, eating disorders, and higher incidence of depression. Lesbian women are more attracted to women with a higher body mass.
There are also a great deal of research, history, and culture relating Gender Roles and Career Choices with that of being a Lesbian.
Greek stories of the heavens often included a female figure whose virtue and virginity were unspoiled, who pursued more masculine interests, and who was followed by a dedicated group of maidens. Foster cites Camilla and Diana, Artemis and Callisto, and Iphis andIanthe as examples of female mythological figures who showed remarkable devotion to each other, or defied gender expectations. Choosing to be lesbian might be a woman’s choice to defy one’s gender role that is constructed socially as well as culturally.
There are even religious factors that causes women to sexually express themselves more freely to other women.
For ten centuries after the fall of the Roman Empire, lesbianism disappeared from literature. Foster points to the particularly strict view that Eve—representative of all women—caused the downfall of mankind; original sin among women was a particular concern, especially because women were perceived as creating life. During this time, women were largely illiterate and not encouraged to engage in intellectual pursuit, so men were responsible for shaping ideas about sexuality. Lesbianism was the only way that women can truly and freely express themselves, emotionally and sexually, to another person.
I read a book by one of the most famous Social Psychologist in the World as well as one of the most faithful Christian I’ve ever encountered: Dr. David Myers at Hope College. (In fact, I read every book and every paper this person has ever published.)
This following book has made the most impact on my views on gays and lesbians; which one is a choice and which one is not; which one is sinful and which one is not.
“What God Has Joined Together: The Christian Case for Gay Marriage, Myers, D. G. & Scanzoni, Letha Dawson (2005), San Francisco, CA: Harper San Francisco. This is an effort to bridge the divide between marriage-supporting and gay-supporting people of faith, by showing why both sides have important things to say.” Buy the book from amazon.com. (You can read chapters from this book for free on Dr. Myers website.)
“What God Has Joined Together is an effort to bridge the divide between marriage-supporting and gay-supporting people of faith by showing why both sides have important things to say. By affirming marriage for all, What God Has Joined Together concurs with conservatives’ call for marriage renewal and a more marriage-supporting culture. And it concurs with liberals’ affirmation of everyone’s right, regardless of sexual orientation, to seal love with commitment and to participate fully in the church’s life and ministry.”
“With its traditional defense of marriage and its progressive embrace of same-sex relationships, this book cannot be pigeonholed, and that in itself is refreshing.”
Dr. Myers made ten Conclusions:
1. Our Reformed and ever-reforming faith tradition beckons us, with open minds, to discern and reconcile the truth in God’s word and God’s works.
2. All humans have a deep “need to belong,” to connect with others in close, intimate, enduring relationships.
3. As one potent example of such relationships, marriage contributes to flourishing lives—to happier and healthier adults, and thriving children.
4. Toxic forces, especially radical individualism and the media modeling of impulsive sexuality, are corroding marriage and the health of communities.
5. Sexual orientation is a natural (largely biologically influenced) disposition, most clearly so for men.
6. Sexual orientation is also an enduring disposition, which is seldom reversed by willpower, reparative therapy, or ex-gay ministry.
7. Out of 31,103 Bible verses, only seven frequently quoted verses speak directly of same-sex behavior—and often in the context of idolatry, promiscuity, adultery, child exploitation, or violence. We infer that the Bible has nothing to say about an enduring sexual orientation (a modern concept) or about loving, long-term same-sex partnerships. (One of our goals was to familiarize readers with biblical scholarship that offers alternative interpretations to the familiar proof-texts used against gay people.)
8. The creation stories focus on human companionship, on the importance of relationship and the formation of new kinship units (most of which will be heterosexual, but some of which, we now realize, may be gays).
9. A Christian case for gay marriage arises from the human need to belong, from the biblical mandate for justice, from the benefits of a culture-wide norm of monogamy, and from a refutation of popular arguments against gay marriage.
10. Although not part of our argument (and therefore in an appendix) we also note—for those who may wonder how history likely will judge us—that attitudes on this sexual issue are rapidly changing, and becoming more accepting of gay rights and relationships.
Moreover, there is a large generation gap, with most older adults opposing gay marriage and most younger adults supporting it. Given that the forces driving the attitude changes are likely to continue, and given generational succession, it appears that the culture war over gay marriage and gay ordination will gradually be resolved in the years to come, much as were previous culture wars over minority and women’s rights.
So in my simple conclusion, gay homosexuality may definitely be the result of genetic disposition since it is almost never fluid. So for gay people, homosexuality should not be a sin.
But as for some Lesbians who are not genetically programmed that way, if it is a choice and if you are a religious person, you might find the following advices helpful: a time for you to choose a better lover, choose a husband who is your best friend first, choose a more emotionally mature partner, choose a more ardent supporter for you career and your equality at home as well as your ambition, choose a husband with a more androgynous personality, and finally choose someone who want to please you in bed for hours.
Posted on 18 September 2012.
1. You finish each other’s sentences… because you can’t stand the sound of the other person’s voice.
2. You have wild, passionate sex all night long. Then you wake up.
3. Whenever you miss each other, you just pick up another dish and try again.
4. Those words “until death do us part” sound more and more enticing. Read the full story
Posted on 18 August 2012.
For those of us having a hard time keeping up with the issues this election year there’s welcome help on the horizon. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. released the latest in their series of voter issue references entitled, Campaign Issues for Dummies.
Using familiar icons as chapter headers, you’ll be able to quickly locate the issue of your choosing. Read, be informed and remember to VOTE.
If you live in a region heavy in manufacturing, then that sucking sound Ross Perot warned you about in 1992 is what you HEARD a few years ago as all your jobs relocated to Mexico. That sound you heard in 2000 was all the high tech service jobs relocating to India and China.
The sound you hear NOW is the sound of jobs in the financial and manufacturing sectors being sucked down a black hole. The next sound you will hear is the WHOOSH of low-wage food service jobs rushing in to fill the void.
If you are a voter concerned about job creation versus job outsourcing, then you should select a candidate with no ties to Big Business, Ivy League schools, Old Money or Secret Societies.
If you are a voter unopposed to globalism, who keeps money in offshore accounts, and neither has nor needs a job, you should select a candidate based solely on the tax-breaks and their unabashed agenda of appeasement of the rich
If you are a voter who has learned Spanish as well as perfected the art of cooking with cumin, you should select a candidate with enough global vision not to wear out America’s welcome before you get there.
If you are a voter who doesn’t mind spending $8.9 billion on a missile defense system that doesn’t work, then you should select the candidate with the highest gullibility factor.
If you are a voter who thinks that defense spending should be drastically cut, you should select the candidate with the LEAST amount of travel in the 3rd World.
If you are active duty military, reserves or National Guard, on your third tour in a combat zone with dependents on food stamps and eating canned spinach, you should vote out the incumbent as a warning to the rest.
If you are an Ivy-League educated voter with a child in private school, you should vote for the candidate who favors spending taxpayer money on vouchers for private schools that keep out the riff-raff.
If you are a voter with children in public school, you should vote for the candidate who favors increased education spending without accountability or performance goals.
If you are a teacher, you should consider a second job while selecting the candidate who went to public schools and state college.
If you fall into the 18-34 demographics, you should vote for the candidate who declines using this issue to raise your taxes.
If you fall into the 35-65 demographics, you should vote for the candidate who guarantees that Medicare won’t go completely broke by 2019.
If you fall into the 65 and up demographics, you should apply for Canadian citizenship.
If you are an avid fan of the 2nd Amendment, you should join the NRA and vote for the candidate they tell you. Afterall, they’ve got all the guns
If you’re an advocate for gun control, you should stay out of redneck bars in Montana and vote for whomever Michael Moore endorses.
If you’re more of a pragmatist than a single-issue voter, you should vote AGAINST any candidate that makes this a hot button issue. But, keep your head down.
If you believe the United States has a moral obligation to lead the fight in the War on Terror, even if it means acting unilaterally, then you should select the candidate with a “shoot-from-the-hip” attitude who is most likely to “smoke ’em out and get ’em running,” without the need for time-consuming activities such as “good planning.”
If you believe the United States should work and cooperate with other nations to sustain steady pressure, including military action, on rogue nations who support and sponsor terrorism, without getting over-extended, then you should select the candidate with the most actual combat experience.
If just want to end this thing by any means necessary, so that no terrorist organization would dare attack U.S. targets again for fear of a fate worst than death, you should select the candidate with organized crime ties.
If you are a voter who finds it comforting to have a leader during wartime that reminds you of the your rich, spoiled fraternity brother you really couldn’t count on, you should select the candidate who has lost the most brain cells due to substance abuse.
If you are a voter who favors decisive, informed leadership through the darkest times, and the ability to abandon failed policies in favor of new, adaptive strategies, while enduring the prolonged uncertainty and stress of war, you should select a candidate with P.O.W. experience.
If you are a voter that favors world domination during the post-war reconstruction, you should select a multi-billionaire megalomaniac industrialist with extensive monopoly experience.
If you are a voter who feels that another people’s personal rights somehow cheapen your own, and advocate adding a 28th Amendment which (unlike most other amendments) works to limit personal liberties, then you should vote for the candidate furthest right on the zealot scale.
If you are a voter who believes that the “granting of rights” is the primary purpose of an amendment, and are not diminished in any way by the personal lives of others, you should select a candidate with relatives who lead alternative lives.
If you are a voter reluctant to express your personal convictions either way for fear of mob violence, vote AGAINST any candidate who makes this a hot-button issue.
If you are a voter who advocates the wholesale destruction of any environmental object that stands in the way of industrial progress and your ability to secure sufficient oil supplies to meet the needs of your Hummer, you should select a candidate who can skillfully misinterpret scientific data, and has the most inclination to arbitrarily adjust environmental standards.
If you are a voter who feels strongly about the preservation of the environment, and desire legislation to outlaw the exploitation of wilderness areas for any reason, you’re out of luck. You should have supported Kucinich when you had the chance.
If you are a pragmatist who seeks balance between technology and nature, you should select a candidate who is NOT from a large east or west coast urban area.
If you’re an analytical sort who questions the real significance of global warming when faced with possible reduced sunspot activity, you’re too damned smart to vote for any of these clowns.
Posted on 05 August 2012.
Housewives forgetting vital ingredients for dinner are costing supermarket chains and the world economy billions of dollars every year. A new study released today has revealed a damaging portrayal of housewives and how they are single-handedly ruining the world economy. Read the full story
Posted on 13 June 2011.
SARASOTA, FL – GlossyNews.com — After nearly four years of marriage, Nathan and Jennifer Reed are starting to worry that their proverbial “honeymoon” might never end, despite several attempts to take each other for granted and argue over petty differences.
While most married couples spend a mere six months ignoring faults and having way too much passionate Read the full story
Posted on 06 June 2011.
New York City Mayor Bloomberg made God-fearing GOP senators quake in their extremely heterosexual boots this week when he came out in favor of gay marriage and said he would do everything he can to support a bill brought before Congress. Read the full story
Posted on 16 May 2011.
For the second time this year, Newt Gingrich has announced nationally that he is definitely considering making a run for President of the United States on the GOP ticket. He admits he has some hurdles to overcome and addressed those hurdles in a speech he gave recently at a private fundraiser in Provo, Utah. Read the full story
Posted on 10 May 2011.
Posted on 28 March 2011.
Modern day journalistic prophets have announced Elizabeth Taylor was in heaven for no more than five minutes before the first complaints rolled in this morning.
Taylor, famous for her feisty temper, charitable nature and a career spanning five decades with a total of eight marriages, claimed “heaven wasn’t meant to be this freaky. If God was the real deal he’d have sent some of these cheating jerks to meet Satan.” Read the full story
All of Our Categories:Top Stories - Top Stories; Politics - Top Stories; Serious Commentary - Top Stories; World News - Top Stories; Biz News - Top Stories; War Zone | Horoscopes
Entertainment - Entertainment; Celebrity Gossip - Entertainment; Television - Entertainment; Music - Entertainment; Internet Tubes - Entertainment; Books, Newspapers & Misc - Entertainment; Movies
Society - Society; Health - Society; Crime - Society; Travel - Society; Crooked Cops - Society; Education - Society; Strange People - Society; Religionism - Society; Human Interest - Society; Kidz Zone
Science and Technology - Science and Technology; Science - Science and Technology; Technology - Science and Technology; Gadgets & Gizmos - Science and Technology; Environment
Sports - Sports; Scandals - Sports; Athletes - Sports; Events | All the Rest - News in Your Briefs - Making Headlines - Opinion/Editorial