What science says about homosexuality

[Skaloop]

Gay = desired sex acts.

Lesbian = desired sex acts.

Bi-Sexual = desired sex acts.

Then Straight = desired sex acts.

Are these desired sex acts specific to each group? Does everyone in each group desire those specific sex acts? What about people who are part of a group but do not desire sex acts?

"Gay" is a neologism to do away with the word homosexual as a negative connotation.

Linguistic nitpick: gay is not a neologism. A neologism is a new word, but gay was around long before it was associated with homosexuality the way it is now.

Otherwise we just have men and women, boys and girls. Now, why does anyone need to label themself by their sexual tastes?

You're straight, right? A heterosexual?

Why must you label yourself by your sexual tastes?

 

[Maren]

Gay = desired sex acts.

Lesbian = desired sex acts.

Bi-Sexual = desired sex acts.

"Gay" is a neologism to do away with the word homosexual as a negative connotation.

Otherwise we just have men and women, boys and girls. Now, why does anyone need to label themself by their sexual tastes?

As opposed to married, which per your apparent definition is "actual monogamous sex acts with a person of the opposite gender". So why do you feel it necessary to label yourself by your sexual activity?

Though, honestly, I think you could ask that about any type of label people use. Why do we call people "Lefties" or "southpaws"? Why do we call people "White" or "Black"? Why do we try to define people as "conservative" or "liberal"? Why do we label people as "rich" and "poor"? Why do we label people as "cool" and "nerd" (or "geek"). I'd suggest the reason we use labels in general, including the labels for sexual orientation, is because we (as humans) appear to want to categorize people in neat little boxes. Though let's not derail the thread with this question, though it might make an interesting thread if someone wanted to start it.

 

[IzzyPop]

[/indent]
I answered why we focus strictly on sex of of it. It is GLB's that label themself by their preferred sex acts.

My sexuality is never what I label myself as in any way. I'm not "straight," I am just me. Now, the GLBT community definately presents differently.

I'm wrong how?

Wait, what? My favorite sex act is one that is commonly shared between two men. Even though I am attracted to women, does my preference for this act identify me as gay?

 

[FlamingFemme]

[/indent]
I answered why we focus strictly on sex of of it. It is GLB's that label themself by their preferred sex acts.

I can only speak for myself, but I can say that this is not true for me. If someone asks me if I'm married, I say yes, let me introduce you to my wife. I certainly don't start talking about my 'preferred sex acts'. And every person I have ever known is the same way. If you mention that you're married, does that mean that you are 'label[ing] [your]self by [your] preferred sex acts'?

My sexuality is never what I label myself as in any way. I'm not "straight," I am just me. Now, the GLBT community definately presents differently.
I'm wrong how?

We wouldn't have to 'label' ourselves if the rest of you didn't treat us as some kind of leprous 'other'. And even if I tell you that I have a wife, has that told you ANYTHING about my 'preferred sex acts'?

Do you see where I'm coming from, here?

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Wait, what? My favorite sex act is one that is commonly shared between two men. Even though I am attracted to women, does my preference for this act identify me as gay?

Ask yourself that question.

I do not want to ask, nor do I want you to tell me.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

I can only speak for myself, but I can say that this is not true for me. If someone asks me if I'm married, I say yes, let me introduce you to my wife.

Two wives? Where's the husband?

I certainly don't start talking about my 'preferred sex acts'. And every person I have ever known is the same way. If you mention that you're married, does that mean that you are 'label[ing] [your]self by [your] preferred sex acts'?

That's a dodge. "Lesbian" is a declaration of sexual behavior. "Gay," is a declaration of sexual behavior. "Bi-sexual" is most definately a declaration of sexual behavior.

We wouldn't have to 'label' ourselves if the rest of you didn't treat us as some kind of leprous 'other'.

But two women being wives IS some kind of other. That is not our fault.

And even if I tell you that I have a wife, has that told you ANYTHING about my 'preferred sex acts'?

Of course it does.

Do you see where I'm coming from, here?

Obviously.

 

[Skaloop]

Ask yourself that question.

I do not want to ask, nor do I want you to tell me.

Well, my favorite sex act is one that is commonly shared between two women. Even though I am not a woman, does my preference for this act identify me as lesbian?

 

[IzzyPop]

Ask yourself that question.

Why would I ask myself? You are the one making the statement about someone's preferred sex act being their identifier. I am asking you for clarification because your statement made no sense what so ever.

I do not want to ask, nor do I want you to tell me.

Um. Good.

 

[sidhe]

That's a dodge. "Lesbian" is a declaration of sexual behavior. "Gay," is a declaration of sexual behavior. "Bi-sexual" is most definately a declaration of sexual behavior.

Cool. Tell me what sexual behavior I engage in, then.

But two women being wives IS some kind of other. That is not our fault.

Let me dig it out from my blog...

…the problem is that it’s really easy to look at people and say “evil, weak, stupid, unworthy, and lazy”. It’s hard to look at the homeless guy or the drug addict or the prisoner and say “brother” or “sister” or “that could be me, had I made a different choice”.

I was talking about this whole subject with a buddy of mine. There are a few ways of approaching the world and the “evils” that exist within it:

1) “Evil” is something separate from me. It is the realm of demons/the flesh/devils/monsters/etc. I am not part of that, it is not part of me. I cannot be of that. Those who practice evil are monsters, they deserve nothing but contempt and death. They are not men. I am good, so long as I am unsullied. I must feel guilt for any feelings I have that makes me close to the monsters. I must rend my garment and repent of it.

2) “Evil” is something inside me, too. In order to control it, I must indulge it.

3) “Evil” does not exist. “Evil” is within me. I am capable of the very things I abhor. The murderer, the pedophile, the rapist, the racist, the thief…these all dwell within me, the capacity for violence, lust, power, hatred, and greed. I am stronger than these things, I need not indulge them. I control my desires totally, and use them to further myself. I am a king, whether in fine robes or in rags. Yet, I can see myself in the Other. The Other is within me. They are my brothers and sisters. They are not “evil”, they are not “weak”, they have succumbed to the same desires I have, and been changed by them. They are still men and women, they are still of my family. They deserve the mercy I would desire, whether they can be redeemed, or must be destroyed.

As long as you see "the other" as less than yourself and separate from yourself, you're doomed to failure. You're no different than me.

(not to compare my LGBT sorors et fraters to criminals, but it's the same kind of thought process - "I'm not like them, so they are less than me.")

Of course it does.

You're not very creative then, are you?

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Why would I ask myself?

I'm not going to label you until you do that to yourself.

You are the one making the statement about someone's preferred sex act being their identifier.

Really? I did not event the words Gay, Lesbian, or Bi-sexual. People that engage in that sexual behavior did.

I am asking you for clarification because your statement made no sense what so ever.

Gay
Lesbian
Bi-Sexual

All based on sexual behavior.

What part of that don't you understand?

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Cool. Tell me what sexual behavior I engage in, then.

I didn't ask. I don't want you to tell.

Let me dig it out from my blog...

As long as you see "the other" as less than yourself and separate from yourself, you're doomed to failure. You're no different than me.

I haven't failed at explaning myself in any way. And you being "other" is not anything to do with me.

(not to compare my LGBT sorors et fraters to criminals, but it's the same kind of thought process - "I'm not like them, so they are less than me.")

My mother was a woman. She is not less than any other woman.

You're not very creative then, are you?

I don't need to explain the obvious. On that.

 

[IzzyPop]

I'm not going to label you until you do that to yourself.



Really? I did not event the words Gay, Lesbian, or Bi-sexual. People that engage in that sexual behavior did.



Gay
Lesbian
Bi-Sexual

All based on sexual behavior.

What part of that don't you understand?

The part where you are wrong, I guess.

Those labels are not based on sexual behavior. A gay woman having sex with a man does make her a heterosexual. Gay, lesbian, and bi-sexual goes towards attraction, not behavior.

 

[David Brider]

People choose to have sex.
People choose who they will have sex with.
People choose why they have sex.
People can remain celebate and do.

No one has to have sex with anyone. It is always a choice or it amounts to rape.

When people say that homosexuality isn't a choice, they're not talking about having sex - they're talking about homosexual orientation; that is, who they're attracted to.

David.

 

[David Brider]

Gay = desired sex acts.

Lesbian = desired sex acts.

Bi-Sexual = desired sex acts.

No; gay, lesbian and bisexual don't denote desired sexual acts - they denote who a person is likely to be romantically and physically attracted to, and to form romantic relationships with. A gay person, for example, is likely to be attracted to people of the same gender as him or herself. The "desire" (or more accurately attraction) is to people, not to any specific sex acts.

David.

 

[quatona]

G, L, B, all have to do with what THEY do in their bedrooms (and elsewhere).

Why the need to be labeled by sexual desires?

As far as I am concerned, I don´t think there are many occasions in which labeling by sexual desires is important.
Then again, it seems to me like pretty much every topic you participate in and every post you write depends exactly on this: labeling people by their sexual desires.

 

[Veyrlian]

Because the Bible contains moral instructions, a precept on moral behavior that same sex should not occur. Wouldn't that involve hypocrisy when the OT teaches something as plainly immoral, which by rights should never of been immoral in the first place?

Obviously that has a BIG theological implication, but within the scope of ethics and morality alone, wouldn't that label the gay churches worshipping a god that was at one time immoral?

I don't understand what you are saying here. Are you saying it is hypocritical to follow instructions which you feel are wrong? And are you also saying that worshipping an occasionally immoral god is immoral?

If you are, I don't think I agree. It's not necessarily hypocritical to follow instructions even if you feel they are wrong, but it would be hypocritical to except others to follow them even if you do not.
As for worshipping a God that has been immoral, it depends on how you think it is now. If you think it has changed for the better, and have discarded its previous commands on account of their immorality, you are behaving according to your own morality, not against it. If however, you worship it and follow all its commands, even the immoral ones, you obviously are partaking in its immorality.
Homosexual Christians who would think other homosexuals as abominations or green jelly would obviously be hypocritical and immoral. Not to mention a bit lunatic.

Did I entirely misunderstand?

 

[Veyrlian]

What is this anyway? Who needs 5 or 6 pages to understand that gay, lesbian, bi-sexual or heterosexual are not categorized by SEX ACTS? I'd think it would be like the default, level 1 stance.
What if someone has all kinds of sex with a partner? Is he/she like, an undecided freak? Should we put it in a circus?

 

[Veyrlian]

Again, suffering consequences for engaging in illicit behavior is not "oppression". Sexual conduct is one of the most regulated behaviors throughout history due to the sensitive nature of relationships, the deep feelings it illicits, and of course the relationship to family.

As I said, responsible people meeting minimal community standards of behavior are not going to have problems with people nosing around as to exactly what they do in the bedroom. What is being proposed now is public policy, not private sexual behavior.

So umm, you'd be fine if someone came to your bedroom and made notes? Or are you saying that unless you do something else, which would in this community be considered unstandard, it would be expected that someone would come and observe your bedroom acts to better regulate them?

Wouldn't it be easier to just install cameras in every bedroom. This way no one would have to make any guesses about anyone's sexual behaviour, and all non-standard acts would be weeded out swiftly and efficiently.

 

[KCKID]

So umm, you'd be fine if someone came to your bedroom and made notes? Or are you saying that unless you do something else, which would in this community be considered unstandard, it would be expected that someone would come and observe your bedroom acts to better regulate them?

Wouldn't it be easier to just install cameras in every bedroom. This way no one would have to make any guesses about anyone's sexual behaviour, and all non-standard acts would be weeded out swiftly and efficiently.

 

[Veyrlian]

The repeated assertion that open homosexuality doesn't cause harm is merely an assumption. There is a good bit of historical evidence that such behavior represents a breakdown in a culture, or is at least symptomatic.

Where?

Having such behavior modeled and held up as normal will eventually influence out children. We know this because different societies at different times have accepted a wide range of behaviors and had them proliferate, even if self destructive.

When?

Human sacrifice is not even beyond the realm of possibility as far as the things a society can grow to accept.

... sure. Is this somehow relevant to the homosexual issue?

A fellow commented on a blog I left on Town Hall the other day, "Never remove a wall if you don't know why it is there." Sound advice.

How about removing an obstruction which is in the middle of the road for no apparent reason?