The Gay Question... Again... Still...

AlteredEgo

Mythical Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Posts
19,175
Media
37
Likes
26,254
Points
368
Location
Hello (Sud-Ouest, Burkina Faso)
Sexuality
No Response
My original post this morning:
Lack of proof of one theory doesn't prove another theory. This is basic logic, lack of which implies an arrested ability to think clearly.

Did you happen to miss that part where you directly single me out? Or are you in denial as usual?


Was that other post not after (and only after) you chose to decide that I was talking to you? Don't bother to answer. We can all read. Right?

And... "as usual"? Don't make me laugh. What is that? Monkey-see, monkey-do? They dosay immitation is the sincerest form of flattery, however, you can spare me yours.
 

frizzle

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Posts
1,043
Media
0
Likes
9
Points
183
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Sexuality
Pansexual
Gender
Male
And... "as usual"? Don't make me laugh. What is that? Monkey-see, monkey-do? They dosay immitation is the sincerest form of flattery, however, you can spare me yours.

You make me chuckle, that's a rarity coming from someone such as yourself. But alas this is getting way too off-topic, so again I'll state my belief that all sexuality is choice, nutrue not nature.
 

AlteredEgo

Mythical Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Posts
19,175
Media
37
Likes
26,254
Points
368
Location
Hello (Sud-Ouest, Burkina Faso)
Sexuality
No Response
You make me chuckle...
Still an original, huh? You remind me of the child-hood retort: "I know you are, but what am I?" *shrug* You immitate me, but dislike other immitators. Interesting.

I'll state my belief that all sexuality is choice, nutrue not nature.

That's better. It should be stated as a belief, not presented as fact. It's just a theory like everyone else's. Unlike some of the other theories in play, it is insulting to anyone who knows how long they've experienced various attractions, revulsions, and urges. That is why it is a viewpoint which gets singled out. It was the viewpoint which I singled out initially, not any of the individuals who presented it.
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,678
Media
0
Likes
2,812
Points
333
Location
Greece
Hi Frizz, shouldn't you be studying?

I am no biologist, but it seems to me that animals including us, behave and have physical attributes to elicit a sexual response. How can you nurture that?
 

Jism

Sexy Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2007
Posts
199
Media
9
Likes
46
Points
113
Location
France
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
frizzle with your looks and your dick I wouldn't worry. you will find plenty of people who like you and if they turn you on go for it.
 

frizzle

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Posts
1,043
Media
0
Likes
9
Points
183
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Sexuality
Pansexual
Gender
Male
Still an original, huh? You remind me of the child-hood retort: "I know you are, but what am I?" *shrug* You immitate me, but dislike other immitators. Interesting.

Well you'll have to excuse me while I laugh then.

That's better. It should be stated as a belief, not presented as fact. It's just a theory like everyone else's. Unlike some of the other theories in play, it is insulting to anyone who knows how long they've experienced various attractions, revulsions, and urges. That is why it is a viewpoint which gets singled out. It was the viewpoint which I singled out initially, not any of the individuals who presented it.

Well it's as much as I have belief in that fact. Like I believe evoultion is a fact, but yet again it is a theory. There is more evidence backing up evolution than electrical theory, yet people still have problems believing that.

Hi Frizz, shouldn't you be studying?

I am no biologist, but it seems to me that animals including us, behave and have physical attributes to elicit a sexual response. How can you nurture that?

Well because that's what their designed for, hetrosexual sex to reproduce. I'm pretty sure we wern't designed to be gay were we? That would be a pretty shitty start.

Also, I've "studied" enough, and learned that Shakespeare's Tempest is a horrible play.

frizzle with your looks and your dick I wouldn't worry. you will find plenty of people who like you and if they turn you on go for it.

I don't see what that has to do with anything, but thanks? :confused:
 

Male Bonding etc

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2006
Posts
920
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
163
Location
Southwest USA
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
frizzle with your looks and your dick I wouldn't worry. you will find plenty of people who like you and if they turn you on go for it.
Pray, let him not reproduce before he learns enough of the world not to perpetuate his current views onto the next generation!
 

dudepiston

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2006
Posts
595
Media
0
Likes
16
Points
163
Location
Indiana
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
Ok, Frizzle - I'll ask this question of you AGAIN, and maybe, do us the favor of actually answering it this time:

When did YOU, personally, make the "LIFESTYLE CHOICE" to be straight? To be deeply attracted to the female body? To have orgasms thinking about females? To have sex with females, and be very very turned on by them? When did you CHOOSE all of that?

This seems very clear to me! Our natural sexual inclinations & desires cannot be a choice.

Our behavior & attitudes CAN be a choice.:cool:




You aren't born straight or gay. Again, all sexuality is, is a lifestyle choice.
 

AquaEyes11010

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2007
Posts
787
Media
10
Likes
172
Points
263
Location
New Brunswick (New Jersey, United States)
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Where is your proof? No one knows this to be true.

Here's an interesting way to look at his argument. If sexuality is completely chosen, then why do str8 people choose to be str8? You'll probably hear either "because being gay is gross" or "because being str8 is the right way to be." Let's tackle both responses.

If "being gay is gross" then it implies that there is some deterrent to the person being gay, that the idea is "gross." This means that there must be something inherent within him that blocks homosexuality, which implies that his sexuality is not completely a choice, because he's biased in one direction based on a negative feeling toward one.

If "being str8 is the right way to be" is why he's not gay then he's doing as he's told, meaning he has no personal preference for being gay or str8, but that he's following society's convention by not being gay, i.e. he learned to become str8.

And remember, if a rule has to be passed about doing one thing and not another, then logically both things were being done beforehand, or else there would be no need for the rule. If both were being done before, then that implies that both are natural forms of behavior, and that denying one because of a societal rule is actually going against nature.
 

AquaEyes11010

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2007
Posts
787
Media
10
Likes
172
Points
263
Location
New Brunswick (New Jersey, United States)
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Well it's as much as I have belief in that fact. Like I believe evoultion is a fact, but yet again it is a theory. There is more evidence backing up evolution than electrical theory, yet people still have problems believing that.



Well because that's what their designed for, hetrosexual sex to reproduce. I'm pretty sure we wern't designed to be gay were we? That would be a pretty shitty start.

Also, I've "studied" enough, and learned that Shakespeare's Tempest is a horrible play.



I don't see what that has to do with anything, but thanks? :confused:


Human sexuality does not revolve around reproduction only. If it did, then sex wouldn't occur outside a woman's fertile period, and those fertile periods would be obvious to men. Such is the case among chimpanzees, whose females exhibit a far-from-subtle sexual swelling that peaks alongside their most fertile times. A close relation, the bonobo, has much more restricted female genital swelling, and humans have no detectable physical signs of fertility save slight temperature changes which would require sensitive thermometers to discern. As outward signs of fertility decreased, sex occurred more randomly, and evolved a social significance. Chimpanzees rarely have sex outside a female's fertile period, yet bonobos have sex frequently and without regard to a female's fertile period, and among all variations (male-male, male-female, female-female). Humans very clearly do not have sex solely for reproduction, and using the argument that reproduction is the only purpose for sex so as to denounce homosexual behavior is completely ignorant.

If homosexuality wasn't natural and normal for our species, it wouldn't have been occurring as frequently and for as long as it has, and we wouldn't even need to discuss it. Do we talk about whether or not it's natural to jab red-hot needles into our fingertips as a form of pleasure? No, because it's too uncommon to even be considered anything other than bizarre. Yet we continue to discuss whether or not an aspect of human behavior which has occurred for all known time across all cultures in about the same frequency is normal or not. Of course it's normal, within the context of observed behavior for our species. Frankly, if we weren't "meant" to do it, it wouldn't be possible. I personally don't believe in creation, so terms like "designed" and "meant for" don't mean anything to me, but you used it in your argument earlier.
 

dudepiston

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2006
Posts
595
Media
0
Likes
16
Points
163
Location
Indiana
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
I think you are onto something here, Aqua. Your logic is almost correct...about as correct as it can be about something this complex.

What bothers me about Frizzles responses is that they are so simplistic. Like he's given this topic maybe 10 minutes of solid thought his entire life back when he was 13 & then stuck with those ideas, logic & preponderance of evidence be damned.

My opinion on this subject is, I obviously didn't CHOOSE who or what I'm sexually attracted to. That feels like something inherent within me, and until or unless some expert can prove it otherwise, I'm going with the 'nature' idea. I'm naturally gay - it's just how it is.

We really probably can't come to a true conclusion about this unless we DO get the kind of objectivity that another poster was hinting at - we'd need to be Clairvoyant Aliens from Space, observing all human behavior and thoughts and make judgments based upon that. Remember - all we know about sexual behavior is what people choose to tell the scientists & each other. But if Aliens could see the behavior and thoughts/desires of all humans on Earth, I'm sure a very very interesting story would be told, one that I'm sure Frizzle wouldn't bother to read, since, after all, he already knows everything.:rolleyes:



Here's an interesting way to look at his argument. If sexuality is completely chosen, then why do str8 people choose to be str8? You'll probably hear either "because being gay is gross" or "because being str8 is the right way to be." Let's tackle both responses.

If "being gay is gross" then it implies that there is some deterrent to the person being gay, that the idea is "gross." This means that there must be something inherent within him that blocks homosexuality, which implies that his sexuality is not completely a choice, because he's biased in one direction based on a negative feeling toward one.

If "being str8 is the right way to be" is why he's not gay then he's doing as he's told, meaning he has no personal preference for being gay or str8, but that he's following society's convention by not being gay, i.e. he learned to become str8.

And remember, if a rule has to be passed about doing one thing and not another, then logically both things were being done beforehand, or else there would be no need for the rule. If both were being done before, then that implies that both are natural forms of behavior, and that denying one because of a societal rule is actually going against nature.
 

frizzle

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Posts
1,043
Media
0
Likes
9
Points
183
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Sexuality
Pansexual
Gender
Male
Ok, Frizzle - I'll ask this question of you AGAIN, and maybe, do us the favor of actually answering it this time:

When did YOU, personally, make the "LIFESTYLE CHOICE" to be straight? To be deeply attracted to the female body? To have orgasms thinking about females? To have sex with females, and be very very turned on by them? When did you CHOOSE all of that?

This seems very clear to me! Our natural sexual inclinations & desires cannot be a choice.

Our behavior & attitudes CAN be a choice.:cool:

When I hit puberty. Obviously.

Human sexuality does not revolve around reproduction only. If it did, then sex wouldn't occur outside a woman's fertile period, and those fertile periods would be obvious to men. Such is the case among chimpanzees, whose females exhibit a far-from-subtle sexual swelling that peaks alongside their most fertile times. A close relation, the bonobo, has much more restricted female genital swelling, and humans have no detectable physical signs of fertility save slight temperature changes which would require sensitive thermometers to discern. As outward signs of fertility decreased, sex occurred more randomly, and evolved a social significance. Chimpanzees rarely have sex outside a female's fertile period, yet bonobos have sex frequently and without regard to a female's fertile period, and among all variations (male-male, male-female, female-female). Humans very clearly do not have sex solely for reproduction, and using the argument that reproduction is the only purpose for sex so as to denounce homosexual behavior is completely ignorant.

You've obviously missed the point, it isn't the only reason for sex, but that's what nature has designed for us to do. So yes having without reproduction is technically unnatural, but then again so is homosexuality. Like I said, I choose to have sex without having a baby, just like people choose to have homosexual relationships.

If homosexuality wasn't natural and normal for our species, it wouldn't have been occurring as frequently and for as long as it has, and we wouldn't even need to discuss it. Do we talk about whether or not it's natural to jab red-hot needles into our fingertips as a form of pleasure? No, because it's too uncommon to even be considered anything other than bizarre. Yet we continue to discuss whether or not an aspect of human behavior which has occurred for all known time across all cultures in about the same frequency is normal or not. Of course it's normal, within the context of observed behavior for our species. Frankly, if we weren't "meant" to do it, it wouldn't be possible. I personally don't believe in creation, so terms like "designed" and "meant for" don't mean anything to me, but you used it in your argument earlier. It's possible for me to stick my finger in my eye and blind myself. I don't think we were meant to do that. But then you say if we weren't meant to do it wouldn't be possible then go on to say you disagree with terms like designed and meant.. quite percuilar.
 

Phenix

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2004
Posts
149
Media
6
Likes
102
Points
173
Location
Las Vegas, NV USA
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
As far as I'm concerned, this argument is moot. It has been PROVEN by a team of scientists in the UK (and I'd be happy to give you references) that being gay is no different than being left handed or having red hair. In other words, it's genetic or put another way, there's a strong genetic influence on sexual orientation.

Frizzle, you state you chose to be straight when you hit puberty. Well try this one on for size (no pun intended): I knew I was gay at 4 or 5, well before I'd reached the age of reason. What do you make of that? It was not a choice; it was my natural inclination. Peace,

Phenix
 

frizzle

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Posts
1,043
Media
0
Likes
9
Points
183
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Sexuality
Pansexual
Gender
Male
As far as I'm concerned, this argument is moot. It has been PROVEN by a team of scientists in the UK (and I'd be happy to give you references) that being gay is no different than being left handed or having red hair. In other words, it's genetic or put another way, there's a strong genetic influence on sexual orientation.
Proof?

Frizzle, you state you chose to be straight when you hit puberty. Well try this one on for size (no pun intended): I knew I was gay at 4 or 5, well before I'd reached the age of reason. What do you make of that? It was not a choice; it was my natural inclination. Peace,

Again. Proof?
Phenix

Verrrry interesting.
 

HotBulge

Worshipped Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Posts
2,381
Media
114
Likes
17,853
Points
518
Age
34
Location
Lowells talk to Cabots, Cabots talk to God
Gender
Male
I am inclined to think that one's sexuality is "cultivated" during adolescence and young adulthood. The more positive experiences that one has - both in courting another individual and in how your peers acknowledge those relationships - reinforces one's sexual orientation. For example, I think the typical heterosexual male becomes cultivated as a "heterosexual" because he has probably had some affirming experiences with attracting the opposite sex and has those attractions "reinforced" by his peer group and society. If the social stigma were taken away from "gayness" during adolescence, I think the world would see a lot more bi or pansexual behavior.
 

Phenix

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2004
Posts
149
Media
6
Likes
102
Points
173
Location
Las Vegas, NV USA
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
A five year old isn't capable of making a decision like that. Study some basic developmental biology.

And, I refer you to the work of Drs. Qazi Rahman (University of East London) and Glenn Wilson (University of London) and their recently published book, Born Gay.

In fact, if you'd like me to send a review of the book written by an Episcopal Bishop (!!), I'd be happy to shoot it to your email. Peace,

Phenix
 

frizzle

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Posts
1,043
Media
0
Likes
9
Points
183
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Sexuality
Pansexual
Gender
Male
A five year old isn't capable of making a decision like that. Study some basic developmental biology.

I doubt a 5 year old is capable of making a decision that they'll be gay or straight for the rest of their live aswell.

And, I refer you to the work of Drs. Qazi Rahman (University of East London) and Glenn Wilson (University of London) and their recently published book, Born Gay.

In fact, if you'd like me to send a review of the book written by an Episcopal Bishop (!!), I'd be happy to shoot it to your email. Peace,

If you could please, it'd be an interesting read. But I'd like to point out that just because one documentary, one book, film, one survey or one explantation goes in one way of something, does that not mean it is ultimately proof. But I degress, my email should be in my profile, if not PM me please.

Phenix

.
 

Phenix

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2004
Posts
149
Media
6
Likes
102
Points
173
Location
Las Vegas, NV USA
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male

I don't understand your first statement; could you please clarify it? I've never been sexually attracted to women my entire life...I tried a few times, but alas, I was hopelessly gay...

Also, I'll shoot you that review...thanx for being interested enough to read it.:smile: Peace,

Phenix

"Build bridges, not walls."