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.
I understand perfectly. The behavior vs. attraction goes pretty much like this: gay thoughts creep into your head. You choose to act on it and do "gay stuff" or you choose to stop dwelling on the gay stuff and straighten up your crooked ways. Did I put that simply enough?
Sure, you put it very simply... and just further proved to us that you do NOT understand the difference between attractions & behavior. Either that, or you aren't following the conversation very well. Again, we were addressing the belief that one can choose their ATTRACTIONS - not what they do after the initial attraction. So unless you can prove that people have control over their subconscious desires, not to mention biological reactions, I stand by the theory that people are born gay.
Not that any of this matters, mind you. Whether they choose to be gay or not, I still believe they deserve equal respect... they also shouldn't have to "suppress" natural feelings, just to appease other people and their opinions. I am naturally attracted to black men, and some folks might have a problem with that (since I'm a white woman). Would it be fair to urge me to date white men, simply because some racists are offended by my relationships? Screw 'em, I say.
Do you realize how ridiculous this sounds? A gay person doesn't stop being attracted to the same-sex. It's part of the brain wiring. They can't "straighten up".
My goodness humanity is doomed if so many people are this clueless.
Humans have all kinds of impulses/thoughts
- Should I speed on the freeway
- Should I eat that extra slice of pizza
- Should I order another drink before driving
- Should I go in for the kiss
It's our decision whether to act on them or not. "Attraction" changes. I was once turned off by girls of the same race as my sister so I gravitated towards the opposite. But now it doesn't matter.
10/10 gay males would have sex with a female if stranded on a desert Island. The issue is our society and what has become available: Online pornography. Meeting strangers online.
15 years ago, the only way to see another male penis was to go into a YMCA and stare in the locker room. That's no longer the case.
Sure, you put it very simply... and just further proved to us that you do NOT understand the difference between attractions & behavior. Either that, or you aren't following the conversation very well. Again, we were addressing the belief that one can choose their ATTRACTIONS - not what they do after the initial attraction. So unless you can prove that people have control over their subconscious desires, not to mention biological reactions, I stand by the theory that people are born gay.
Not that any of this matters, mind you. Whether they choose to be gay or not, I still believe they deserve equal respect... they also shouldn't have to "suppress" natural feelings, just to appease other people and their opinions. I am naturally attracted to black men, and some folks might have a problem with that (since I'm a white woman). Would it be fair to urge me to date white men, simply because some racists are offended by my relationships? Screw 'em, I say.
Nobody is disputing your initial attraction, so I am not sure why you are still stuck on that. You are trying to make an argument where there isn't one. A child molester, yes I know you won't like this comparison, but will you deny that their attraction is a genuine attraction or do you feel that they are choosing children despite not being attracted to them? I believe they truly are attracted to children.
Nobody is disputing your initial attraction, so I am not sure why you are still stuck on that. You are trying to make an argument where there isn't one. A child molester, yes I know you won't like this comparison, but will you deny that their attraction is a genuine attraction or do you feel that they are choosing children despite not being attracted to them? I believe they truly are attracted to children.
And?
Adult homosexuals who seek consensual relationships with other consenting adults are not comparable.
A pedophilic orientation actually doesn't hurt anyone either. If a pedophile locks themselves in a tower and never touches a child, what harm is done? But to act on that attraction IS harmful to children.
Anti-gays want homosexuals to deny their natural proclivities, and live as celibate beings for what purpose? Humans are sexual animals, and deserve the right to be fulfilled sexually in any way they want so long as it does not harm anyone else.
- Should I speed on the freeway
- Should I eat that extra slice of pizza
- Should I order another drink before driving
- Should I go in for the kiss
It's our decision whether to act on them or not. "Attraction" changes. I was once turned off by girls of the same race as my sister so I gravitated towards the opposite. But now it doesn't matter.
10/10 gay males would have sex with a female if stranded on a desert Island. The issue is our society and what has become available: Online pornography. Meeting strangers online.
15 years ago, the only way to see another male penis was to go into a YMCA and stare in the locker room. That's no longer the case.
Western society is decadence.
Another internet psychologist joins the discussion! Welcome, you're in good company with many fellow alumni!
Adult homosexuals who seek consensual relationships with other consenting adults are not comparable.
A pedophilic orientation actually doesn't hurt anyone either. If a pedophile locks themselves in a tower and never touches a child, what harm is done? But to act on that attraction IS harmful to children.
Anti-gays want homosexuals to deny their natural proclivities, and live as celibate beings for what purpose? Humans are sexual animals, and deserve the right to be fulfilled sexually in any way they want so long as it does not harm anyone else.
We are discussing attraction vs. behavior, not whether or not gay people harm others.
Anti-gays want homosexuals to deny their natural proclivities, and live as celibate beings for what purpose? Humans are sexual animals, and deserve the right to be fulfilled sexually in any way they want so long as it does not harm anyone else.
Maybe some of them want that but not most. But is it too much to want some standards? No matter what your personal politics, two men in a committed legal union is NOT the same thing as a man and a woman in the same type of structure, nor are two women for that matter. In fact its just part of the whole general increase in social sloppiness that for the most part when two men marry, both of them become husbands. What? You wouldn't call two gay men a lesbian couple would you? You could, but really shouldn't, call two women a gay couple, a homosexual couple, a same sex couple, but gay was once a term for same sex men and lesbian a term for same sex women.
We don't really know for sure that humans have the right to be fulfilled sexually in any way they want. Actually we do know: it is not true. There are forms of sexual fulfillment that are, even now, socially taboo or even criminally taboo. Fewer and fewer jurisdictions prohibit same sex bonding. It seems not to be enough. Opposite sex pair bonding and the religious and legal and social structures that support it are under attack just so that same sex couples can feel normal and accepted. What if they aren't? We don't allow smokers to think that cigarette smoking is normal and healthy. We did once. Untold numbers of otherwise healthy people have died because in decades past they were not protected from the unhealthy activities of smokers. We don't put smokers in prison, nor has smoking been classified as even a Class B. Misdemeanor. But any smoker who, in 2014 tries to tell a judge or jury in a court of law that they were completely unaware of the light in which smoking activity is held would be laughed out of court.
I get that gays would want their behavior normalized and accepted. Supported and promoted even. Should we? Should it? I don't think the answer should be left up to gays. We know what their answer is. Is that the right answer for society going forward is the question. If you don't think Jason Collins coming out as gay is going to influence some kid on the fence then you don't know anything about role model influence. Without any promotion whatsoever and despite considerable disincentive, same sex attraction and bonding have been persistent components of civil society. What about when it is completely assimilated? When the present ~10% of the population self identified as gay becomes ~20% or ~30% will the issue still be seen as benign? I'm just asking.
At this point all I really want is to know what exactly I am being told when I am told that so and so and so and so are "married". I don't think that is too much to ask. Otherwise we can just go back to the 14th Century and everyone will be 'youse' and the listener (don't think there was much reading) can make their own conclusions.
are you saying you want gay people to be celibate or if they want sex have it with a member of the opposite sex?
I think what people are saying is that if a gay person wants to get married and have their marriage recognized as being equal to other marriages then if that gay person is male they should marry a woman and vice versa. Its not that difficult. That's how its been done for millenia. You do what you want on your own time but when you are wearing that ring and when you tell people you are "married" the assumption, and the truth, will be that you are married to a person of the opposite sex.
If for whatever reason, legal and binding social structures need to be created between same sex individuals they should not be called marriage. It's above my pay grade to say exactly what terms and/or vernacular should be created to support the new kinds of 'civil union' but marriage is already taken.
Nobody is disputing your initial attraction, so I am not sure why you are still stuck on that. You are trying to make an argument where there isn't one. A child molester, yes I know you won't like this comparison, but will you deny that their attraction is a genuine attraction or do you feel that they are choosing children despite not being attracted to them? I believe they truly are attracted to children.
Actually, the initial attraction is PRECISELY what we were discussing, so I was correct about the second guess - that you just aren't following this line of conversation. I can't go back & cut/paste from my phone right now, but if you go back yourself you'll see which specific comment we were addressing. To summarize, that other poster said "humans can control their attractions." If you want to discuss behaviors, that would be a whole different issue. So yeah, don't tell me "nobody is disputing" the very dispute to which I was originally responding! LOL
As for pedophiles, that has nothing to do with this conversation. But if you are attempting to draw comparisons, they have a victim while adult homosexuals (only dating other adults) do not. So there is no good reason for the latter to suppress anything, unless you think consenting adults should live a lie or in celibacy just to please you. But yes, I believe a pedophile's attractions are "naturally occurring" too.
Edit: Okay, I'm on a real computer now... so just to end your confusion (and jumping in without knowing how it began), here is the initial post which started this part of the discussion:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red_Diamond
Life is ALL about choices. Up to and including choosing who you find attractive and who you don't.
NOW do you see why I was arguing about attractions (not behavior) & our control over them?? If you still don't get it, I officially give up.
Last edited by gizmo980; 02-26-2014 at 04:39 PM..
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.
