LGBT discussion (science, morality, history)

submitted by Fonched from self.debatealtright

Note: I am neutral on this topic at present. I am not forcing these beliefs on anybody, nor do I endorse any item linked here. I will gladly accept answers from either side of the issue. The purpose of this thread is to attain a better understanding of their position on homosexuality/transgenderism through multiple sides of the story and their nuances.

This thread is a good-faith, open discussion regarding the validity of LGBT lifestyles, the driving factors in these people having their gender/sexual identity, and homosexuality throughout history. I personally have understood the woes of such identities, although these findings have led me to question my previous understanding. If anyone can help me see through these, that would be a triumph for us.

Science-wise, LGBT identities are upheld by many experts in the present day, with many agencies having declassified homosexuality and transgenderism as mental disorders and publishing studies to support the idea that it is naturally prevalent and doable. Take one well-known study that set off the push to declassify homosexuality as a mental disorder by many health organizations. In summary, two groups of homosexual and heterosexual men were subject to psychological tests, which concluded the homosexual men had no signs of mental illness. Someone had suggested to me that this study might have been concluded without the use of lobotomies and therefore not a valid meter; there is not much too it as of far and many of us haven’t inspected into the Evelyn Hooker study.

Continuing this, there is a popular claim that many of these people’s health woes or bad habits can be minimized through medical treatment or by being supportive to the LGBT person in question. These purported downsides may also be products of sample bias or outdated studies that were said to have been done with the purpose of chastising homosexuality/transgenderism or conducted prior to other pro-LGBT knowledge circulating. Are there any negative effects that remain despite the care and celebration by society?

I also want to investigate the claims that these identities are nothing new, and that the recent rise is solely as better pastures have been reached for these people to come out. Would some 1880s farm girl have been secretly crushing on other girls, or would some 13th century peasant boy have wanted to come out as a transgender woman? This seciton also applies to any historical figures rumored to be gay, such as Da Vinci and Hadrian.

This will be the concluding portion. Are there any right-wing sources that have examined pro-gay studies and rebuttals such as these? Other topics of interest may be the status of homosexuality in the Bible, repressed homosexuality, and institutional issues LGBTs continue have today. I encourage all to preserve and share the responses to build on for further discussion and to reflect new findings.

Sources:

*https://www.hrc.org/resources/understanding-the-transgender-community (information on institutional issues, such as lack of jobs, healthcare, and poverty despite the praise given by many)

*https://i.4pcdn.org/pol/1616412077348.jpg (Ontario study about transgender youth life conditions and parental support)

*https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/183724747/ (gay sexual abuse discourse)

*https://web.archive.org/web/20210126095706/https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Homophobia

*https://web.archive.org/web/20201102192509/https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Debunked:_gay_men_have_500-1000_partners

*https://web.archive.org/web/20210225200636/https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Refuting_anti-LGBT_arguments

*https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting

*https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/245431343/#245454614 (a compendium of pro-transgender studies)

*https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/227699061 (more pro-LGBT studies)

*https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/235620971/#235620971 (rumored gay historical figures)

all 32 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Gays have always existed and always will. They should not be persecuted for being gay but it should also be understood that this lifestyle is sterile, prone to self harm, diseases and excess. Gay men are 1.5-2% of the population yet 75% of AIDS cases and 47% of pedophiles.

The average gay man has sex with over a thousand people in his lifetime and they have a subculture called bug chasing where they willingly give each other aids.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugchasing

Thus there should be some limits on them. If two or multiple gay men are doing their thing discreetly, away from the public eye, I have no issue with them. However, they cannot be allowed to preach or advocate for this lifestyle. They cannot engage in homosexual acts in public like two men kissing. They cannot be permitted to solicit or groom non homosexuals and absolutley not kids.

And of course they cannot be allowed to adopt kids and should be barred from professions where people deal with kids like teachers, coaches and so on.

As for trannies...a hard no.

These people are mentally ill and their delusions should be entertained in the slightest. They literally can't accept reality and seek to engage in self mutliation an dother sorts of perversions.

[–]Girondin 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Don't trust any old social psychology or any old social science (pre 2000s before replication bias) they all have massive flaws in them. All major social psychology experiments you've heard (Milgram, Rosenhan, etc) are all false.

Evelyn Hooker study is treated like Gospel their are so many flaws. She already had an agenda before (the UCLA school of medicine founder preformed sex change operations), n=60 (30 homo 30 hetero) eliminated any subjects who were currently in psychiatric therapy, did three diagnostic tests with no oversight and discarded the results of two of them. I think it intuitively it makes no sense, as LGBT have much higher suicide rate and is contradicted by better data and method

Stereotype threat is fake (see Russel Warne, Emil OWK and sean last) so I doubt acceptance will really help them unfortunately.

Im skeptical of most histroical claims of gayness after I read "Sex Lives of the Great Artists" by Nigel Cawthorne, I assumed those claims were true until I actually read about it, guy has written like 20 books on sexual history. Nearly all of those claims come from gay rights activist, few from neutral sources.

I personally don't trust psychiatry I agree with the writings of Peter C. Gøtzsche and Thomas Szasz overall on the this subject. I don't like the language of "mentall illness" and I don't think its legimate unless brain scans actually diagnose mental illness.

[–]Fonched[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Now that I have read the Transgender Industrial Complex I further understand where this is coming from. However, I was told the “Overt Male Homosexual” study was replicated several times, always to the same results. Whether the manipulation occured or not in those retrials, or what reasoning was there for them, I don't know. How was the exclusion of psychiatric patients even touted as fair?

Meanwhile you mentioned changes to psychological studies, which could have rendered the study worthless despite its legacy. What were they like, even though these people would probably be ahead of the curve and are seemingly still accepting the results of MOH?

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Science-wise, LGBT identities are upheld by many experts in the present day, with many agencies having declassified homosexuality and transgenderism as mental disorders and publishing studies to support the idea that it is naturally prevalent and doable

I'm going to start with a simple question. If a consensus of 'experts in the present day' shifted and said that the LGBT 'lifestyle' was toxic, dangerous and should be discouraged for the good of the country and public health would you change your position and oppose it? Is this really about data and science for you?

[–]Fonched[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

I am just looking into what reasoning and evidence they have for being pro-gay. If the medical and scientific experts shifted back to that stance, I would also look into what they have to say. Then I would compare the facts.

[–]Girondin 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Read the history of this stuff, notice how many of them are sexually deviant / non-normative. A lot of their positions is not grounded in objective reality but on personal wish-fulfillment. most of the experts are employed in gender clinics and/or gain rewards and prestige from advocacy groups, so of course their supportive of LGBTQ acceptance.

Im not denying all of their research or theories or whatever, but their is bias just like all fields of inquiry. like people in quaranic or biblical studies think it is more important then it is, sociologist thinking social effects matter more compared to evo psychologist who think biology matter more etc.

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Most people I chat with online that support the LGBT community don't do it because the woke academic institutions say that it's safe and healthy to be LBGT. They support the LGBT community because there's a framing in the Jewish run media that LGBT people are an innocent persecuted group of individuals historically and presently. There are lot more layers of complexity though.

The Jewish people have a long running religious belief that 'God' has both male and female traits. This drives their desire to protect and promote LGBT. Another big reason the Jewish community funds and fervently supports LGBT is because they oppose traditional 'cis gender' societies for a host of reasons. Creating a large homosexual population in a host nation reduces birth rates and causes a support for Jewish causes. It's a way to create a 'golem' for Jews.

[–]Fonched[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That is true to an extent, basically pushback whenever someone's not tolerant and loving. It's when rebuttals along the lines of LGBT science appear, even with the more intellectual leftists. Then it needs to be researched.

As for them, yes. I believe the Torah mentions people with different kinds of genders. Plus they comment on how they fare better in diverse communities. Although everything is just a canard and organically driven by other people...

[–][deleted]  (13 children)

[deleted]

    [–]Richard_Parker 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    but so far I've seen little evidence that homosexuality is acquired or associated with pedophilia.

    Right-winger Devon Stack is adamant this is the case. He did a livestream with Ramzpaul that is now only on bitchute. It is well worth a listen. He does rely on anecdotal evidence but also expresses doubt how a gay gene would carry since gays cannot naturally have children unless they override their natural sexual preferences for procreation. It is not as simple as that though because there is some indication that women who have kids later in life or have lots of kids (and the youngest later in life), there is greater association of homosexuality in those male offspring because there is a testosterone deficiency in the "bath" that the fetus is immersed in during incubation. Also happens a lot with maternal male twins, with one twin having less testosterone. If you go to his Insomnia stream last Thursday, he talks about how social mores have really slipped drastically in the past 30 years, as we went from "don't say gay" to Blues Clues Drag Queen Singing, Drag Queen Story Hour etc.

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    He does rely on anecdotal evidence but also expresses doubt how a gay gene would carry since gays cannot naturally have children unless they override their natural sexual preferences for procreation.

    There's a plausible genetic explanation, and for "simply gay" it's pretty straightforward: the same gene that would cause men to be strongly attracted to men would also cause women to be strongly attracted to men - and this causes enough of a boost to the number of children a woman has for that gene to persist.

    [–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    I do think there's evidence of the link but let's assume there isn't. There's another issue here. Taking the 'L' as you put it on the LGBT issue means there will be no opposition and it will continue to grow and be normalized. Our elites don't want gays they want the treadmill to Brave New World type open families and extreme sexual freedom. Normalized LGBT lifestyles does lower birthrates and it spreads a general hedonism that leads to a loosening and then abolition of laws around pedophilia. LGBT is just a Fabian society technique to get us to depopulate and engage in rampant Sodomy of all types.

    [–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

    "Not saying it leads to the healthiest of lifestyles, but so far I've seen little evidence that homosexuality is acquired or associated with pedophilia."

    I've seen much evidence it is which manifests itself in the veneration of the 'twink' aesthetic and just the sheer amount of cases you see of homosexuals who end up engaging in acts with boys in the 13-15 year age but I won't say that absolutely proves the link but I think it's there. Also as others have pointed out 'Queer Theory' really is just synonymous with pedophilia. The two have never been separate and all the leading figures have made arguments in favour of incest, pederasty etc.

    Here's one interesting statistic though that I find good data that homosexuals are committing pedophilia at a much higher rate. In Australia according to our own health data around 1.45 million people report having been sexually abused as children with around two thirds being girls and around 450,000 being boys. These numbers have been consistent over a couple of decades as well. So let's be generous and say that homosexuals are 2 percent of the population rather than 1. That means that statistically there are probably around 500,000 homosexuals in Australia but they're not all men of course. So we've got a population that is committing these crimes at a staggering rate. 13 do 50 is nothing we're talking 1 percent doing 30 here.

    Now this is just back of the napkin type stuff so feel free to shred me but it looks like they commit pederasty at a pretty astonishing rate compared to the rest of the population just going by those numbers.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    So let's be generous and say that homosexuals are 2 percent of the population rather than 1.

    Exclusive homosexuality is a fairly stable two percent in both men and women. The number of those with any level of same-sex attraction is much higher.

    [–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Yep. Whatever the number is it's still the case that they seem to be committing these crimes at a much higher rate than the general population.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    In Australia according to our own health data around 1.45 million people report having been sexually abused as children with around two thirds being girls and around 450,000 being boys.

    I can't find the source for this claim. These figures seem to line up with the number of Australians that claim to have experienced "sexual assault" after the age of 15 (including adulthood). And in any case, why do we assume that the perpetrators are men here? In terms of actual behavior, women and men probably commit these sorts of crimes at similar levels - but women tend to get away with a lot more. That's true in general, but especially here.

    [–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    http://www.ecav.health.nsw.gov.au/uploads/60438/ufiles/publications_and_reports/Published_Reports/VAN_Resource/Factsheet_1_digital_2.pdf

    [–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    And in any case, why do we assume that the perpetrators are men here?

    Because they nearly always are.

    In terms of actual behavior, women and men probably perpetrate these sorts of crimes at similar levels - but women tend to get away with a lot more.

    Gonna need something to back that one up. In terms of physical abuse I think this is definitely true but I've actually never even heard anyone claim no matter their political inclination that women are as likely to sexually abuse children as men.

    [–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    These figures seem to line up with the number of Australians that claim to have experienced "sexual assault" after the age of 15 (including adulthood).

    Exactly which is a good indication that the pattern of overrepresentation in sexual violence and abuse persists and that homosexuals as well as being overrepresented in child sexual abuse are equally as overrepresented in teen and adult sexual abuse given that in the stats I posted below only half of the male victims of adult sexual abuse were abused by women. 1 percent do 50.

    [–]Girondin 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    First of all how many people have argued this in the dissident right? I have not seen this on amren, counter-currents (you can argue its a conflict of interest) or occidental-observer, Unless you are talking about Andrew Anglin and some twitter ppl we are not taking the L.

    It is also not a unreasonable hypothesis, It is a fact that LGBT have higher rates of child abuse and higher rates of being sexual abusers. (see some research here their is a minor effect in the literature.)

    [–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    Gay people can hide their sexuality. No one has to know you're gay unless you publicly out yourself as one.

    That's my stance I've also supported, and I've never been in favor of chasing someone down for not harming anyone.

    The Gay Pride Parades and Pride Months are over the top nonsense. Homosexuality can never create children, so celebrating it doesn't really feel liberating. If you're a gay person, just be glad you live in the tolerant West and not the Middle East where they stone you for this stuff...

    If anything, we need a Western Civilization Pride Month. Since it's literally the only Civilization that gives them rights.

    I have no issue with the Same-Sex marriage. If they want to larp as husband and wife, more power to them. They'll probably end up divorced anyway.

    [–]douglas_waltersWhite Supremacist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    I have no issue with the Same-Sex marriage. If they want to larp as husband and wife, more power to them. They'll probably end up divorced anyway.

    Which devalues the custom of marriage and signals that such degeneracy is, at least, moderately respectable.

    Homosexuality, to a certain degree, is something that will need to be endured because it cannot be fully purged from society. But even ‘soft’ institutional support for it is repugnant and undesirable.

    [–]Richard_Parker 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

    I will admit that I only read part of this thread outright, skimming other parts. Concerning whether homosexuality is genetic or created from environmental and cultural factors, it is not a simple, binary either or proposition.

    There is some evidence that the older a woman gets, or more boys she has, the more likelihood the youngest son is gay because of problems with the "testosterone" bath that a male fetus is immersed in during incubation. This also happens a great deal with identical twins.

    On the other hand, the evidence that homosexuality tendencies--particularly in women--are greatly influenced by sociological and cultural factors is pretty clear, and pretty clear with but a cursory look at the culture and current social mores. Since the 90s, with normalization of porn in society, including girl-girl, threesomes, things like Girls Gone Wild, the prevalence of bisexualty in women from Generation Down has increased persisently. The social pressures which normalize this, make it a key feature in desirable, hypergamous women to allure the most socially dominant males are evident for all to see. None of this things can seriously be argued by anyone. I do not need studies to prove any of the statements above, as these things are as prevalent and as obvious as the fact that people are usually having sex before marriage.

    We also have hard data. Something like 16 percent of Zoomers--ZOOM, ZOOM, ZOOM--identify as gay. This is because homosexuality is encouraged and celebrated in this sick culture. This is on the heels of the remarkable way in which LGB+ have been more ostentacious and obnoxious, replete with drag queen story hour, childrens books and childrens programs etc. Correlation does not always mean causation but there can be no other rational explanation in this instance.

    While men seem more hard-wired to be either homosexual or heterosexual (most gay men I have known have identifed as such since an earlier age), and while it is true straight men have a hard-coded, visceral reaction to seeing men make out or being exposed to images of gay sex, I am not even sure is immune from social conditioning at an early age.

    I will disclose that my earliest memories of sexual desire include seeing Deborah Harry in Blondie videos when I was six or seven in first grade. I also though Lady Di was really beautiful wanted to kiss her (this was in early 80s). I really believe that seeing images of Deborah Harry, probably not entirely appropriate for a small boy, set the course for the hardwiring I now have. I cannot say with any real assurance that a similar boy would be similarly effected by seeing some gay at a gay pride. Given how widespread pederasty and bisexuality in men was in certain Ancient civilizations, I believe men too are subject to social and cultural conditioning.

    For that reason, I want young boys exposed to things like Deborah Harry--still suggestive but decent enough. Keep the fag shit under wraps, in the closet.

    [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

    the evidence that homosexuality tendencies--particularly in women--are greatly influenced by sociological and cultural factors is pretty clear

    What the science suggests is that all women get turned on by other women, at least a little bit.

    Something like 16 percent of Zoomers--ZOOM, ZOOM, ZOOM--identify as gay.

    This includes a lot of other things, particularly identities which have been invented very recently and really don't have any actual meaning.

    This is because homosexuality is encouraged and celebrated in this sick culture.

    The effect of favoritism in admittance and hiring cannot be understated. It's like what they're going for is to make it so that the only way a white guy is going to get a job is by putting on a dress and lipstick.

    I want young boys exposed to things like Deborah Harry

    Right, pop divas... where could you go wrong?

    [–]Richard_Parker 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    "What the science suggests is that all women get turned on by other women, at least a little bit."

    Not sure I would describe it that way. Female sexuality sure seems fluid. You have women like Kate Pearson who were into men mostly for decades then gomlesbian. I heard Dr Drew (I know) say while having Ray Oldhafer on that menopausal women going lesbian seems to be repeatable men as they get tired of men. I do know men do not work that. Should circumstance turn me into the most raving, homicidal misogynist, I will still be repulsed by the idea of being with men sexually.

    "This includes a lot of other things, particularly identities which have been invented very recently and really don't have any actual meaning."

    Not sure, and it does not really matter. proves that social and cultural factors do weigh heavily.

    "Right, pop divas... where could you go wrong?"

    Yeah, I get it, that stuff is certainly decadent, but in that particular manifestation not all that bad, particularly compared with contemporary figures like Katy Perry, Ariane Brand etc, whose lyrics and imagery are downright scandalous (whereas Deborah Harry was just sexy but still had some class about her, even as she failed to become a mother sadly). Six year old boys should probably not be exposed to it, or maybe they should in a modified way.

    To be sure, I was being a bit flippant about Deborah Harry, but when compared with what is going on today with gays getting to our kids and really regardless I think it is healthy for boys to understand what desirable women are (within certain boundaries) and this is something you should be drawn to. I imagine same thing for girls when they see a cowboy in an advertisement or a firefighter or other male figure.

    [–]Fonched[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Reminds me of what they are arguing about LGBT characters in cartoons for instance. They claim that such characters are solely there to provide representation to their viewers (instead of "OMG! Kids catching the gay from their TVs!"), further backed by the fact that many LGBT people today were raised seeing straight relationships/cis characters in the media and still turned out to be that way.

    [–]Fonched[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Exactly, the whole affirmative action, straight being the default of society, I'll argue that this being more popular is a real circumstance, not 100% the case though.

    [–]Jesus 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    Gays reject Christ. Gays will always exist. Gays should not be persecuted but they should not be praised either, they should exists as heterosexuals do, w/ humility but we don't see that all to often in the egocentric gay community. Instead, one homosexual has 4 molestation victims whereas the heterosexual community 1 and every 11 has a victim. Okay, so obviously not every homosexual molests children so that statistic must mean that there is a fervent pedo cult in the homosexual community that rapes at a frequency that nobody wants to talk about. Okay, now spread more Gay propaganda on children sais Mr. Weinstein and Schneider.

    In addition, children say 5 years old should not be propagandized by homosexual propaganda or how it's okay to have sodomy. The media, such as netflix and youtube are pushing these videos on children as are they what I call black scum music, not to be confused with good music put on by blacks. The scum music involves degeneracy such as singing about rape, doing others violence, weapons/guns, drugs, etc. This is subhuman music; devil music that turns kids brains of all colors into mush.

    [–]Fonched[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    What do you have to say about the articles posted on this site? https://www.gaychristian101.com/ How would you compare the articles there to this post about translations that have resulted in references to homosexuality?https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/78917576/#78957117 I'm somewhat lost on this at the moment, as many on the left have been arguing that the Bible has never entirely condemned homosexuality while arguing about older religion hating on gays.

    [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Would some 1880s farm girl have been secretly crushing on other girls

    They'd probably do a lot more than secretly crushing. The thing is, they would still marry and have a family. It wasn't until the "gay movement" came around that this would be considered anything abnormal.

    [–]FrenologistSaving the World 1 Cranial Exam at a Time 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Not a single one of those links appears to be objective. I'll come back and discuss when someone posts objective information that is based in ACTUAL science and not the peer-reviewed, circle-jerk of modern academia. Wikis ARE NOT legitimate sources nor are shill threads from 4pol.

    [–]Fonched[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Well then, what do you have to prove your stance?

    [–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist[M] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Please respond replies in the thread or we will pull this down for rule 4 thread abandonment.