Discussion Forums > The Lounge
Things that amuse you
Burkingam:
I don't see how sexual orientation would put people in categories at all. In fact, I don't even like the expression "sexual orientation", I usually say sexual preference. I don't think your sexual preferences define you entirely as a person any more than I think your favorite music defines you. I see it entirely as a matter of taste. It's possible to like metal and hip hop at the same time, just like it possible to like one and to dislike the other, or to like both but to prefer one, I see sexual preferences in the same way. Being attracted be a sex is not a choice, just like you can not chose to like or to dislike this or that music, but you can still chose not to act on it, in both cases. And, even though I don't like hip hop, I would still think it's wrong to ban hip hop, and so in the same way, even if I was 100% straight, I would still find it wrong to persecute GLBT people.
The evidences that homosexuality is genetic is actually pretty damn weak, although I still agnostic on the matter, but it doesn't matter to me. If homosexuality is an acquired behavior, as long as we don't have any reason to say gay sex is bad, gay sex is not bad. If homosexuality is innate, if we had legitimate reasons to say it's wrong, it would still be wrong. So it's completely irrelevant whether it comes from nature or nurture. The only thing that matters is that there is no legitimate reason whatsoever why homosexuality would be wrong. There is no victim, and the only harm it causes that wouldn't also be caused by straight sex wouldn't exist if it wasn't for homophobic bigots.
Goldfrapp:
Hohoho.
All this talk talk about liking/not liking geys is pretty amusing.
Or, Nodame trying to talk herself out of stuff is more amusing than anything. (Sorry, but I'm laughing out loud here I'm sitting.)
However. I guess your just influenced by your culture, and have troubles with personal/"objective" view on how you look upon homosexuals.. since you like Burk.. or do you now really, since you don't like, or can't respect what he likes to do? (we all know what that is, don't we?) So you like how he is in here, but you can't really know how he is in real life? Would you respect him in real life, where you would get to see how he looks or behaves?
Well. Just because you (as in all who thinks this, not just one person) have a narrowed view on what is ok, or "standards" for how gey people should be, I feel sorry for you.
Or, waiiiit. I don't feel sorry for you. I find you amusing! And I'm laughing. Pretty Loud;)
--- Quote from: Burkingam on July 21, 2012, 08:58:06 PM ---I don't see how sexual orientation would put people in categories at all. In fact, I don't even like the expression "sexual orientation", I usually say sexual preference. I don't think your sexual preferences define you entirely as a person any more than I think your favorite music defines you. I see it entirely as a matter of taste. It's possible to like metal and hip hop at the same time, just like it possible to like one and to dislike the other, or to like both but to prefer one, I see sexual preferences in the same way. Being attracted be a sex is not a choice, just like you can not chose to like or to dislike this or that music, but you can still chose not to act on it, in both cases. And, even though I don't like hip hop, I would still think it's wrong to ban hip hop, and so in the same way, even if I was 100% straight, I would still find it wrong to persecute GLBT people.
The evidences that homosexuality is genetic is actually pretty damn weak, although I still agnostic on the matter, but it doesn't matter to me. If homosexuality is an acquired behavior, as long as we don't have any reason to say gay sex is bad, gay sex is not bad. If homosexuality is innate, if we had legitimate reasons to say it's wrong, it would still be wrong. So it's completely irrelevant whether it comes from nature or nurture. The only thing that matters is that there is no legitimate reason whatsoever why homosexuality would be wrong. There is no victim, and the only harm it causes that wouldn't also be caused by straight sex wouldn't exist if it wasn't for homophobic bigots.
--- End quote ---
Indeed <3
Ixarku:
I have absolutely no problem with anyone who identifies themselves as part of the LBGT group, at least not on the basis of anyone actually being LBGT. I'm actually very strongly against prejudice on the basis of sexual orientation or race. There are plenty of other reasons to hate people in the world without resorting to hating someone for reasons that strike me as largely arbitrary.
I don't personally feel threatened by gay men, for instance -- I look at them as less competition! Lesbians, OTOH, are just wrong.
Nikkoru:
I dislike the idea of homosexuality being environmental largely because I hate Freud. My hatred stems from my early childhood, when I was hit on the head with a copy of The Interpretation of Dreams, or maybe I just resent him as a representation of the father figure to whom I naturally feel repressed oedipal antipathy.
Anyways, there's also this. I also don't claim special wisdom beyond what's been seen in the studies, but they've been more suggestive a biological relationship than anything psychology has mustered on the matter of childhood sexual development. There's also the part where people try to "cure" people of their sexuality, which tends to not end well.
I don't really care about homophobia, I have genuinely homophobic friends... but finding rape amusing is a tad indecorous.
Burkingam:
--- Quote from: Nikkoru on July 21, 2012, 10:00:11 PM ---I dislike the idea of homosexuality being environmental largely because I hate Freud. My hatred stems from my early childhood, when I was hit on the head with a copy of The Interpretation of Dreams, or maybe I just resent him as a representation of the father figure to whom I naturally feel repressed oedipal antipathy.
Anyways, there's also this. I also don't claim special wisdom beyond what's been seen in the studies, but they've been more suggestive a biological relationship than anything psychology has mustered on the matter of childhood sexual development. There's also the part where people try to "cure" people of their sexuality, which tends to not end well.
I don't really care about homophobia, I have genuinely homophobic friends... but finding rape amusing is a tad indecorous.
--- End quote ---
Just answering the arguments in the videos. Remember I don't positively think that homosexuality is not innate, I'm just not convinced that it is. It still might be.
I don't find Freud's arguments convincing either. Not a big fan. He's the king of asspull.
That homosexuality is also fond in nature tells us very little about whether it's innate or not, and even less if it's generic.
"You don't just decide who you love" I agree. Nothing to do with nature vs nurture.
70% of identical twin... some could say it proves it's not 100% generic and we could also argue that identical twins usually have very similar nurture.
Increased chance of homosexuality with number of children: I would love to read the papers this one was taken from.
"Conversion therapy doesn't work" I don't know if it's true or not but it might be. I'd like to know more on the subject. And it's also possible that with different techniques it would work. I know for a fact that sexual preferences can change with age. There are loads of example of people who thought they were gay at some point and ended up with a girl and vice versa.
"There is nothing wrong with gays" I agree. In fact I go much further than that. Lets abandon the concept of "I discovered I like this gender and so I will only have sex with this gender" and lets just go with whoever you fall for. It shouldn't even be part of the equation, whether the person you fall for is a guy or a gal. If you have always been attracted by only girls and one day you want to bone a guy, his sex should not give you an identity crisis any more than if you have always disliked broccoli and suddenly found yourself craving for some.
Which brings me to what I think is one of the strongest arguments for equal right for gays. So lets say you are completely egoist with no trace of altruism whatsoever. If you are white, you would no longer have any reason to support black rights, nor would there be any direct reason to support women rights if you are a man, because there is very little ways you would become black or a girl (surgery doesn't count because the condition for trans is very different than for "normal" women). The same can not be said for gay right. If you have never been attracted by your own gender, you might be right to think it's unlikely to happen, but it's still a very serious and very real possibility. Hence, supporting gay right could possibly help you directly and you should support gay right even if you are a purely egoist straight person.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version