User talk:Mijopaalmc

Welcome!

Hello, Mijopaalmc, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Fl e x (talk|contribs) 16:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Frot

I reverted your removal of Frot vs. anal sex, as that section is now thoroughly, reliably sourced, is relevant, and you provided no valid reason for removal. Basically, I resolved your and others' problems with it being mostly attributed to certain frot advocates, as the Frot barnstar currently on my talk page is evidence of. The content is relevant because it is a simple fact that some gay men choose frot over anal sex, for the reasons mentioned in that section, and others are very anti-anal. This is an actual topic in the gay male community and should be documented here at Wikipedia. I also made it neutral, though it could do with more neutrality on the pro-anal stance. The same frot vs. anal sex material is mentioned in the Anal sex article as well, after much discussion there, but to a lesser degree. The Frot article should cover the in-depth information on this. Flyer22 (talk) 21:28, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Next time, alert me of any community discussion you are having about me. Flyer22 (talk) 08:34, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I recently asked you a question in Thumbs up on the rewritten "frot vs. anal" section! about a removal I just made. Flyer22 (talk) 18:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 2011

Refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the article Frot. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Do not continue to make unconstructive edits to articles, or you will be reported, which may result in your being blocked from editing. Flyer22 (talk) 00:21, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stop your disruptive editing. You seriously need to stop reverting without discussion. Prove your position correct if you are so right about it, or at least make a valid case. The sources clearly show that Bill Weintraub (and, by extension, his supporters) partly do not engage in anal sex due to the medical risks, such as HIV and AIDS. The new sources I just added show the same thing; for anyone familiar with Weintraub's views, it is well-known that Weintraub and his followers associate anal sex with disease. So I am not sure why you are acting as though you do not know this. Do you somehow think that medical risks do not encompass disease? Either way, I further fixed up and balanced out the section. I keep fixing it up, adding references to it and the like. And you keep removing stuff, nitpicking, etc., a lot of the times without good or valid reasons, and you wonder why I have become hostile and distrusting of you in regards to that article? If you want me to trust you, then stop being so combative and start actually contributing decent material to the article. Why must I be the one doing all the work? Flyer22 (talk) 05:43, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]