Prove me wrong Phobes, a challenge, I'm calling you OUT.

[lawtonfogle]

You're welcome. Thanks for not hating me!



See above, for my answer to EnemyPartyII



Well, I could learn to like something through force of will, but I noted at the time that I couldn't learn not to like men. Even as I got more attracted to women, I couldn't stop having thoughts about men. I think I would similarly find it very difficult, now I know what's hot about ladies, to stop being attracted to them any more. It's like being taught something and then trying to forget it - very tricky.

Some people might be able to stop liking things, but I find it hard. Maybe with therapy I could change back, but I wouldn't want to.



Oh, absolutely, I agree with you! I'm just saying it's nice not to be told that I was born this way. I also happen to know some other queer-by-choice folks. And I also think that the "We can't help it" argument is specious and muddies the waters. Having sex with people of your own sex is not wrong, and that's the important part of any argument with people who disagree. Whether or not it's genes, biology, environment, or a choice for some people is not important, except, of course, to those people.



Thanks for the lesson. And the backpedalling.



This is why I don't like labels, and why I personally prefer to identify as queer rather than bisexual. It is interesting to think about, and it's good that you feel comfortable enough to ask questions about your sexuality, but I hope you never let it upset you. There's no need to force yourself into a box, or to label yourself for good.

In a few years when I have to write my Psychology honors thesis, you mind me getting an interview... You have brought up a really interesting point which I have never thought about, and which I have never seen before... that it is a one way conditioning (I use this instead of choice because to many choice implies a near instantaneous event, not a course of conditionings which can take years). Now comes the next thought, does it work on more than just members of the opposite sex... for some reason I think that looking into the extreme hentai and furry departments could prove insightful... Also taking a look at the paraphilias could help understand this one better... actually, if the study was done under the guise of looking into attraction to extreme things, it could also dodge the bullets that one would receive from touching the realm of homosexuality (be the bullets of liberal or fundy production or both). If nothing else, I think I have found the subject of my next research paper I'll be required to write.

Thank you cantata.
P.S. I actually had those ideas as I was typing.

 

[cantata]

In a few years when I have to write my Psychology honors thesis, you mind me getting an interview...

Sure, just drop me a PM sometime

You have brought up a really interesting point which I have never thought about, and which I have never seen before... that it is a one way conditioning (I use this instead of choice because to many choice implies a near instantaneous event, not a course of conditionings which can take years).

Good point, well made. I suppose I use "choice" because I feel like I was involved in a decision-making process with regard to my sexual orientation, but the word could well be misleading. It certainly didn't happen overnight after I made the decision.

(Of course, this is pretty nuts considering I'm a determinist incompatibilist, but I at least had some semblance of the same illusion of choice as anyone does when we would use the word "choice" of their experience.)

Now comes the next thought, does it work on more than just members of the opposite sex... for some reason I think that looking into the extreme hentai and furry departments could prove insightful... Also taking a look at the paraphilias could help understand this one better... actually, if the study was done under the guise of looking into attraction to extreme things, it could also dodge the bullets that one would receive from touching the realm of homosexuality (be the bullets of liberal or fundy production or both). If nothing else, I think I have found the subject of my next research paper I'll be required to write.

Thank you cantata.
P.S. I actually had those ideas as I was typing.

You're welcome! Cool stuff - it all sounds very interesting. I would like to learn more about how much of sexuality can be changed for different people; it's obviously a subject close to my heart.

My instinct is that learning to like things is easier than learning not to like them, but perhaps you will prove me wrong.

 

[cantata]

'tain 't genetic predisposition anyway.
that's just a convenient excuse.

Out of interest - would you say that everyone is genetically predisposed to be heterosexual?

 

[Beanieboy]

I remember as a boy wanting an EZBake Oven. I hated sports. I often chose to play with girls. I didnt' feel I was a girl, but I just wasn't interested in tackling boys, playing sports, or flushing frogs down the toilet. I didn't choose that. That was simply how I was.
I played jump rope and was very creative and artistic. Of course, Boxers jump rope, so it is only attached to girls in certain contexts.

I believe that the same is true about sexual orientation.
I dated girls in high school. I often remember thinking, "Is this it? Is this what guys are talking about? Why? It's a bit overrated." The first time I kissed a boy, I remember thinking, "ohhhhhh. I seeee."

I didn't learn it. I didn't choose it. It kind of chose me. However, I knew guys that tried to choose to be straight, and it was kind of devistating for the guy and the girl.
But think about it - would you date someone who had to convince themselves that they found you sex attractive?

I remember a date that i had with someone that was my boyfriend for 7 years. On our first date, we were in a bar (mixed mostlly straight bar.) I remember twice leaning in to kiss him, and having to catch myself to stop. it's like it took over me. I don't think that with even a guy, I could try to convince myself that i was attracted unless I was attracted already.

 

[Beanieboy]

I was watching The Butterfly Effect yesterday, and in one scenario, he ends up in prison. There are guys in jail that are part of the Brotherhood, and in order to join, you have to have oral sex with the two head dudes. In Shawshank Redemption, 3 guys gang rape the lead.

So, it seems that men can "change", or at least, rape other guys even if they identify as straight. There is the old joke: What's the difference between a straight guy and a gay guy? About 4 beers. However, I haven't met a gay guy that says, "You know, I haven't been around men for so long that the women are starting to look hot."

 

[ChaliceThunder]

I remember as a boy wanting an EZBake Oven. I hated sports. I often chose to play with girls.

Child! You are telling my story - exactly!!!

I didnt' feel I was a girl, but I just wasn't interested in tackling boys, playing sports, or flushing frogs down the toilet. I didn't choose that. That was simply how I was.
I played jump rope and was very creative and artistic.

Yup!!

I believe that the same is true about sexual orientation.
I dated girls in high school. I often remember thinking, "Is this it? Is this what guys are talking about? Why? It's a bit overrated."

I went a little further - trying to "fit in." All it did was toy with the emotions of the girls I dated, and mess with my own healthy sense of orientation.

The first time I kissed a boy, I remember thinking, "ohhhhhh. I seeee."

I didn't learn it. I didn't choose it. It kind of chose me. However, I knew guys that tried to choose to be straight, and it was kind of devistating for the guy and the girl.
But think about it - would you date someone who had to convince themselves that they found you sex attractive?

I remember a date that i had with someone that was my boyfriend for 7 years. On our first date, we were in a bar (mixed mostlly straight bar.) I remember twice leaning in to kiss him, and having to catch myself to stop. it's like it took over me. I don't think that with even a guy, I could try to convince myself that i was attracted unless I was attracted already.

Awesome post!

 

[TheDag]

I remember as a boy wanting an EZBake Oven. I hated sports. I often chose to play with girls. I didnt' feel I was a girl, but I just wasn't interested in tackling boys, playing sports, or flushing frogs down the toilet. I didn't choose that. That was simply how I was.
I played jump rope and was very creative and artistic. Of course, Boxers jump rope, so it is only attached to girls in certain contexts.

All this has no relevance as to if someone is gay or not. I know some parts of society like to think certain characteristics are feminine and others masculine but it is a load of rubbish.
I used to jump rope (I did have some guys ask if I was a girl on one occasion)
I don't care about cars. When guys started talking about cars andthe girls would go elsewhere to get away from the car talk I would join them.
I don't care for hunting.
I have never been attracrted to a guy (including when drunk).
So what a person likes or doesn't like has nothing to do with being gay or not. I am still yet to see any credible evidence to prove one side correct and the other wrong.

Throw that in with the person on this thread who says they did make the choice and it points towards there not being a conclusive rule one way or the other.

I believe that the same is true about sexual orientation.
I dated girls in high school. I often remember thinking, "Is this it? Is this what guys are talking about? Why? It's a bit overrated." The first time I kissed a boy, I remember thinking, "ohhhhhh. I seeee."

Anybody can believe anything they want but the real question is is it true? For example I could go to my local train station and try and buy a ticket with foreign currency. No matter how much I believe it will be fine and acceptable will never change the fact that I will only get a ticket if I use the correct currency. Belief needs to be in the right thing. (please note i am not commenting on if being gay is a choice or not)

 

[TheDag]

I was watching The Butterfly Effect yesterday, and in one scenario, he ends up in prison. There are guys in jail that are part of the Brotherhood, and in order to join, you have to have oral sex with the two head dudes. In Shawshank Redemption, 3 guys gang rape the lead.

So, it seems that men can "change", or at least, rape other guys even if they identify as straight. There is the old joke: What's the difference between a straight guy and a gay guy? About 4 beers. However, I haven't met a gay guy that says, "You know, I haven't been around men for so long that the women are starting to look hot."

I guess this would come back to what is rape all about. It is not about sex.

 

[Exhausted]

Throw that in with the person on this thread who says they did make the choice and it points towards there not being a conclusive rule one way or the other.

Here here! Humans are too ambiguous for this stuff.

That's why my argument is simply "people should be allowed to do whatever they want amongst consenting adults."

 

[cantata]

Here here! Humans are too ambiguous for this stuff.

That's why my argument is simply "people should be allowed to do whatever they want amongst consenting adults."

QFT.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Here here! Humans are too ambiguous for this stuff.

That's why my argument is simply "people should be allowed to do whatever they want amongst consenting adults."

Define consenting adults...

If we leave it up to the law, then someone (ok, it would take more than one person, but still...) who was very against homosexuals could say that anyone who would consent to a homosexual encounter must be mentally ill enough such that they are capable of consenting, and thus any homosexual encounter is statutory rape.

Also, I could probably find (depending upon how high you set the maturity bar) plenty of unable to consent 16 year olds who you would say should be able to consent (or if the bar was high) or plenty of able to consent 18 year olds you would say shouldn't be able to consent.

While the gist of what you say is true, the more legal side of what you say is lacking.

 

[cantata]

Define consenting adults...

If we leave it up to the law, then someone (ok, it would take more than one person, but still...) who was very against homosexuals could say that anyone who would consent to a homosexual encounter must be mentally ill enough such that they are capable of consenting, and thus any homosexual encounter is statutory rape.

Hardly. By that argument, all parties involved would have to be incapable of consent, so that it would amount to the same as two young children having sex with each other - not rape.

Also, I could probably find (depending upon how high you set the maturity bar) plenty of unable to consent 16 year olds who you would say should be able to consent (or if the bar was high) or plenty of able to consent 18 year olds you would say shouldn't be able to consent.

While the gist of what you say is true, the more legal side of what you say is lacking.

In the world of ethics, it doesn't matter too much. You can judge cases on their individual circumstances. Of course it may be problematic for the law, but I don't think Exhausted was attempting to make a statement about public policy.

 

[TheDag]

Here here! Humans are too ambiguous for this stuff.

That's why my argument is simply "people should be allowed to do whatever they want amongst consenting adults."

can't agree with you there. if I was to come across two people who have made a suicide pact I would do everything i could to prevent it.

I find so many people use that line as long as it is two consenting adults it is fine but those same people don't accept incest (father/daughter or mother/son relationships when the same justification is used. Seems to be a double standard. Sure incest is against the law but remember so was homosexuality once upon a time yet people argued the same point then as well. So I can only conclude you fully support incest. Is that correct?

 

[Isambard]

can't agree with you there. if I was to come across two people who have made a suicide pact I would do everything i could to prevent it.

I find so many people use that line as long as it is two consenting adults it is fine but those same people don't accept incest (father/daughter or mother/son relationships when the same justification is used. Seems to be a double standard. Sure incest is against the law but remember so was homosexuality once upon a time yet people argued the same point then as well. So I can only conclude you fully support incest. Is that correct?

Yep, there is no reason why incest is 'wrong'. Granted, it is gross. Ditto goes for those who wish to commit suicide.

 

[cantata]

can't agree with you there. if I was to come across two people who have made a suicide pact I would do everything i could to prevent it.

I find so many people use that line as long as it is two consenting adults it is fine but those same people don't accept incest (father/daughter or mother/son relationships when the same justification is used. Seems to be a double standard. Sure incest is against the law but remember so was homosexuality once upon a time yet people argued the same point then as well. So I can only conclude you fully support incest. Is that correct?

Well I for one don't have a moral problem with incest between consenting adults.

Of course I may well question whether the offspring has been groomed by the parent during their formative years, which I would find troubling and a factor in whether or not the relationship can be regarded as consensual. But these are the same issues of the complexities of consent as you would find in any discussion to do with who may have sex with whom, heterosexual non-incest sex included.

 

[DieHappy]

Yep, there is no reason why incest is 'wrong'. Granted, it is gross. Ditto goes for those who wish to commit suicide.

Well I for one don't have a moral problem with incest between consenting adults.

I love the smell of moral relativism in the morning.

 

[cantata]

I love the smell of moral relativism in the morning.

Where's the relativism? I'm saying in absolute terms that incest is not inherently morally wrong. Nothing relative about that.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Hardly. By that argument, all parties involved would have to be incapable of consent, so that it would amount to the same as two young children having sex with each other - not rape.

Where I live, in the 'rare' cases that two children of similar age group do do that, the victim is the first one to report it. Stupid law yes, but still a law.

In the world of ethics, it doesn't matter too much. You can judge cases on their individual circumstances. Of course it may be problematic for the law, but I don't think Exhausted was attempting to make a statement about public policy.

I know, it is just that so many people that think would make a good public policy.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Where's the relativism? I'm saying in absolute terms that incest is not inherently morally wrong. Nothing relative about that.

Well... Relative to someone else's opinions, your are possibly right or wrong.

Probably not the relativism you were looking for, no?


I have not seen a good (not counting Biblically based, but being Biblically based doesn't suffice why something should or shouldn't be a law) argument to why incest should be illegal. I just think that most everyone has a giant 'eww' factor tied in with the thought, and the few who don't are quickly shunned by those who do.

 

[cantata]

Where I live, in the 'rare' cases that two children of similar age group do do that, the victim is the first one to report it. Stupid law yes, but still a law.

I don't really get your point here. A child cannot rape another child, because neither is able to properly consent, even if one of them is an aggressor. In the same way, if you were to argue that no one can properly consent to homosexual activity, nobody can rape a member of their own sex.