Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Haha! Wow! You should be a writer. As twisted as this story is, its very entertaining. nice.
Thank you! I owe it all to Sister Taffy of Landover Baptist Church, whose Mommy Series children's stories inspired me ever so much. And I must also credit 1940s issues of Coronet, and the informative 1960s schlockumentaries by Sid Davis, such as Boys Beware, and Girls Beware.
Just a little fiction, here: but not an implausible scenario:
"Bob" is a big, strapping, man's man. He just loves to get busy with women. He loves it so much, he's been married twice, already. Both women cleaned him out. So most of the money he makes goes to child support and alimony. His multi-million-dollar inheritance went to his ex's, too. And on top of that, he's realized that he really, really, dislikes the ladies, except for the sex part. That's why he decked the first wife, and beat the second wife pretty severely (the former wives really lucked-up with that...they got EVERYTHING he owned).
But staying loyal to Bob, through all his troubles, has been "Brett". Brett is even bigger and more strapping and manly than Bob. Brett is a regular stallion, in fact: something that becomes quite obvious when they are together in the locker room. You see, Brett is Gay.
Bob only slowly realized this about his pal. And it took longer for him to accept this inconventient fact. But the two guys love each other like brothers. And Brett has a nice, new 4200 sq. ft. McMansion on a golf course, and has invited Bob to move in, "no strings attached". It would allow Bob to move out of the dilapidated trailer he can barely afford to rent.
Fact is, Brett has it so bad for Bob, he would more than willingly shoulder such a financial burden. But Bob realizes what he means to Brett, and cannot bring himself to impose in that way...knowing that Brett's unrequieted love must be painful for him.
Then one afternoon, doing his hour on the Stairmaster, Bob sees a doctor on The Okra Show. Okra is ecstatic to announce that her friend-doc is marketing a new drug that can permanently cause a man to become gay. Bob realizes that his soul-mate can now become his life-partner!
Only one course of the psychotropic drug, and Bob has no interest in women at all. He is free to enjoy every curve and pinnacle of Brett's strapping body, and is free, at last, to be as mentally intimate with Brett as he never could be with those women. At last, they both know true love.
Brett Buys Bob a new Miata, and they both live happily ever after (until Bob drops dead on the Elliptical Trainer, and his relatives clean out His and Brett's home, while Brett is at the funeral...even though Brett paid for almost everything).
Very good explanation of all the details I did not feel like writing out. You are definitely well-informed. So, my next question to everyone is... Why do we continue to deny all of those rights listed above to people whom are homosexual? Why is it just because they are attracted to the same sex and would like to live happily with one another they are considered abnormal and do not deserve the same legal rights as heterosexuals? Personally, I don't see any reason why not. They just want to be shiny, happy people like everyone else
Thank you for your compliment. IMHO, there are many reasons why people deny this basic equality to gays. For example...
"Ick" - Some people, like myself, consider two guys bumping ugly (yes, I am sexist and consider two girls making love quite hot) to be rather disgusting. As far as I am personally concerned, however, I finally came to realize that the Ick Factor applied to the Elderly and fat people as well, and wasn't a viable reason to deny Equality in a Nation founded on that principle.
Attacks one's sexuality - For much of my youth I was highly homophobic, until I became very comfortable and solidly grounded in my sexuality. Gays simply don't threaten me anymore. I am straight, and that's all there is to that concern.
This was accomplished through a very good friend of mine who trusted me one night walking home from the pub. Our neighborhood, almost solid Irish Roman Catholic at the time, saw open gays openly assaulted. It wasn't very long before our conversations and friendship gave me enough knowledge to be so comfortable with my heterosexuality that my friend was treating me at gay bars, and I treating him at "straight" bars.
However, some people are either unsure of thier sexuality, or for other reasons, feel that gays attack their very sexual orientation.
Religious reasons - 'Nough said. If you ever have the chance, go to a religious anti-gay rally and People Watch very closely. You will see several types of people from those who truely believe their bible and truely consider gays unnatural and sinners, usually the ones with a fanatic gleam in their eyes, to people who aren't totally convinced and merely mouth the words, to people who KNOW it's wrong but don't want to seem "less Christian" or "less straight" to their neighbors. You can sometimes see the pain in the eyes of the last catagory.
Cultural reasons - While some sight this as a reason, especially Athiests, the US and most European, and many Central and Southern American and African countries, have had their cultures heavily influenced by religion. Even an Atheist raised in an Atheist household is deluged with religious culture, at school, on the television and radio, in movies, and especially at school. Here, agina, religion raises it's ugly head.
Axis, I think you are mistaken. I think what Memphis is trying to say is that someday, maybe, with the advance in technology, you may be able to go into a clinic and pick out different genetic traits you would like to have or change about yourself. So this is how it would look. You walk into what resembles a stand up tanning bed and BAM! you're changed! You are now everything you've ever wanted to be. Blonde hair instead of brown, taller than before, a whiz at forensic science, and a homosexual. All the traits/characteristics you picked out and paid for at the front desk. Or the other way around, someone could go in and change all those things and choose to change and be heterosexual instead of homosexual. Its kind of like the concept that someday, as a pregnant woman you will be at the clinic and the doctor will be able to scan through all of your babies genes, make sure there are no diseases and also let you pick out different traits you'd like your kid to have. With the way technology is going, it will probably happen. Oh and please don't comment back about the immorality of it all. I'm very aware of how politics would play into an idea like this and how the two sides of the argument will fight back and forth. I was just laying out a scenerio.
Again, sexual orientation isn't a choice. Who one has sex with IS a choice. The difference between homsoexuality and biological sex.
Homosexual relationships contain as much complexity and sublety as any other relationship.
As a straight person, would you REALLY choose to enter into a relationship with someone of the same gender on the same levels as you would with someone of the opposite gender? If you're a guy, would you really want to PDA, snuggle on the couch, go and pick out furniture, and all the other things you do now with someone of the opposite gender, including intimacies?
If you are, then its biological that you would want to have sex with members of your own sex. If not, then its a choice, and all of the haters have been right.
Personally, I believe homosexuals are born that way. I was born hetrosexual, but I feel that since I was born this way, I know perfectly well what it feels like to be attracted to a human, just like they do. It makes no difference if you're gay or straight, you are simply attracted to different people. Now i don't know what it feels like to be discriminated against, or hated for the way that I am. For that, I have great impathy for them. However, they were born abnormal. Even if 51% of us were straight, and 49% were gay, it would still be abnormal, because the normal would be being straight.
Since it is a genetic abnormality, (I know, science hasn't found the "gay" gene yet, but they are working on it), then there is no reason to get upset by saying its abnormal. Its simply a scientific term. It doesn't make them weird, it doesn't make them evil, its simply abnormal. Its abnormal to be born left handed. Its abnormal to be born with blue eyes. Its abnormal to be born with blonde hair.
I think you have me all wrong. I am not trying to be down on homosexuals, I have homosexual freinds. Saying that they are born that way, and then saying its not a genetic abnormality doesn't make sense. If you are born with something, then there is something in your genes that makes you that way.
Despite decades of searching, despite the entire human genome mapped, no one has found a "gay gene". There are many factors that determine one's sexual orientation, and genetics doesn;t, apperently, play a roll.
While one's hair color is a genetic trait one is born with, one can certainly dye their hair. However, if one is 6' 9" tall, a genetic trait one is born with, how does one change that? Or the horse jockey who wishes they WERE 6' 9" tall. How will they change that? Such shortness is also an "abnormality" as well, according to your use of the word.
Also, you are using "abnormality" incorrectly. Homsoexuality has been found to be quite normal in the human condition. Uncommon, certainly, but not "abnormal" as homosexuality isn't the result of any genetic code malfunction. Dwarfism IS an abnormalty (my apologies to any out there, but it is true), being a Ginger is NOT an abnormality, despite both being somewhat uncommon.
Despite decades of searching, despite the entire human genome mapped, no one has found a "gay gene". There are many factors that determine one's sexual orientation, and genetics doesn;t, apperently, play a roll.
While one's hair color is a genetic trait one is born with, one can certainly dye their hair. However, if one is 6' 9" tall, a genetic trait one is born with, how does one change that? Or the horse jockey who wishes they WERE 6' 9" tall. How will they change that? Such shortness is also an "abnormality" as well, according to your use of the word.
Also, you are using "abnormality" incorrectly. Homsoexuality has been found to be quite normal in the human condition. Uncommon, certainly, but not "abnormal" as homosexuality isn't the result of any genetic code malfunction. Dwarfism IS an abnormalty (my apologies to any out there, but it is true), being a Ginger is NOT an abnormality, despite both being somewhat uncommon.
Then do you believe they are born homosexual? If you do, it must be in the genes. Otherwise its a nuture argument, something in the parenting or the childs upbringing that changed them into homosexuals.
There have been to many accounts of children who displayed homosexual behavior at to young of an age to discount the gene theory.
No one has found a cancer gene thats 100% true yet either. There are lots of genes, and how they react together that we don't understand. Perhaps the mother excreted to much estrogen at one point during the first trimester, or to much testoterone, or something of that nature.
I'm not sure, but I know it happens in the womb. I personally believe its in the genes, some kind of genetic mutation. And as you pointed out dwarfism, they were born that way, for whatever reason, and its abnormal. I feel that homosexuality is abnormal in the same aspect. Nothing wrong with being homosexual, or being a dwarf, or a dwarf homosexual for that matter, but its outside of normal human biology, so it makes it abnormal.
I've heard of actual women who like the idea of being lesbians. In particular women who suffered from long-term sexual or spousal abuse. (Maybe Bob's first and second wife would therefore want to get together, although I don't know how common this is among abuse survivors)
I've rarely heard men express this idea, but that might be cultural. (Also relationship abuse is like 90% male against female or against other male) My guess would be the only guys who'd find this appealing would be straight men with very few straight men as friends who have also had consistent failure at heterosexual relationships. Even then it might not be too common. (Men are more conservative about sexuality than women. On average I think women would be more likely to accept or at least tolerate a woman "converting to lesbianism." I think men would, generally, be more uncomfortable)
What I had in mind for Bob's ex-wives was the kind of conniving little, white Lexus SUV driving, beauty queens I have to socialize with and do business with every day. We gals know the real scoop. Don't believe the distortions fed you by the Liberal Orthodoxy. Women frequently goad men into hitting them: sometimes in order to hit the divorce jackpot, and sometimes just for the drama-value. That's sick, but a high-maintenance friend (who's a serial-'victim' and multiple divorcee) let that secret slip out one time. There are genuine abusers out there, but Bob was not one of them. He just had no business in relationships with women.
I doubt that a 100% hetero guy could really switch teams, any more than a 100% gay guy could. But for the 80% or so who are capable, in varying degrees, of attraction to either gender, a switch would not be so hard...especially if there were some stallion-like "Brett" available. Anyway, I just wrote the story in response to that challenge I quoted at the top.
Men are much more specific in their sexual attractions than are women. Men seem programmed to seek the fittest partner. Women seem programmed to seek genetic diversity. So men are turned on by a narrow range of characteristics, while women are turned on by EVERYTHING (Watching Bonobo Chimps going at it, reading silly sex scenes in Ann Rice's 'erotic' novels, Michael Jackson, Prince...). That's why women are so in denial of their own erotic responses....they're ashamed of being turned on by so much. I am not a typical female. I am only turned on by men and their manliness. My husband cannot even get me to fantasize about a girl/girl/guy scene.
Well maybe as a male it's harder for me to buy that. I buy that there are women who'd goad men into hitting them, but for a man to actually do it means he either is violent or is a moron.
Granted my situation is a bit different. I am a tiny man with a brittle-bone disease. As an adult I think it's wrong to hit anyone, unless in defense, so would never do it. However if I did hit a woman it wouldn't really be the same as a regular man hitting a woman and I think even cops would more easily accept the idea it was self-defense if it were me rather than an ordinary man. (Some people are weird about this though. I remember a show where a little boy was getting beat by an older girl much larger than him and it was played as "laugh at the weakling boy" not "what's the deal with this girl beating up some little boy?")
You described Bob as fairly manly. Therefore I think his action is still very very wrong no matter how unpleasant his wives were. I don't think I'm being overly PC and I'm not a feminist.
It's possible that sexual orientation and traits are hormonally mediated, not "gay gene" related. It's also thought that such hormone washes might create the "born in the wrong body" feeling that transgender people report (and they report feeling it very early in life).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
