How can you believe homosexuality is a choice, unless you're bisexual?

[Zylka]

I don't think Asher is claiming that they actually ARE bisexuals, but that they would have to be to be able to justify their statements.

...because their faith in the existence of "choice" is constructed only by the subconcious realization of their supposed own. THEN WHAT?

[Berzerker]

You have left me stunned, and not in the good way.

Job done then

The troll admits defeat.

Sky -

I don't think Asher is claiming that they actually ARE bisexuals, but that they would have to be to be able to justify their statements.

Another bite, hooray! Why would bisexuals view their orientation as a matter of choice?

[Berzerker]

You're no fun to debate with.

L

[MrFun]

Sometimes (not often at all), I wonder what is the point of whether sexual orientation is a choice??


If it is shown that sexual orientation is a choice, why should that justify legislated discrimination and second-class citizenship??

In predominantly Christian nations for instance, Muslims and Jews continue to choose whether or not they want to remain faithful to their family's religion. Since these are choices, does this mean Christian nations with such minority groups would be justified in degrading them as being immoral, with their "false" worship/belief?

[Rogan Josh]

I don't think the state should care what turns you on. Neither should I ( and I don't).

It is interesting though that everyone here equates being 'gay' with being turned on by people of the same sex. Fair enough, but then they go on to say that the bible condems being gay as a sin. By their definition of 'gay' this is not true.

The bible condems gay sex as a sin. And whether or not one has gay sex is definitely a choice (unless you are raped). Gay people can still abstain from having sex (or fantasising about it!) and be free from sin (well, that sin at least).

Even better, if they completely abstain maybe they will also shut up about it and stop letting their sexual preferences dictate their lives and who they are as people. The sort of obsession that many gay people seem to have strikes me as a little unhealthy.

[Monk]

Originally posted by MrFun
Sometimes (not often at all), I wonder what is the point of whether sexual orientation is a choice?? If it is shown that sexual orientation is a choice, why should that justify legislated discrimination and second-class citizenship??

I've thought along the same lines. The degree to which you can affect your sexuality could provide for an interesting discussion, but it doesn't have much relevance in politics.

[Monk]

Maybe the discussion should be regarded as the reaction to the obvious "I am what I am" argument in favour of gay rights.

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Originally posted by Asher
If it was natural selection, why are there still gay people?

It was only until relatively recently (like last century) that people married for love, before that it was for "alliance" or economic purposes (often times arranged), and aside from reproduction, you weren't your spouses lover, men usually found that outside of the household (with other women or men... and remember audultery really only applied to women)

But socio-anthro will tell you that human sexuality is highly variable, the old model that men like women and vise versa (and everything else is abnormal) is being shattered. This is easier to believe, but there is just too much evidence to support the contrary. Like the classic example of Ancient Greece where man-boy and boy-boy sexual relations were common and sanctioned, and these same men would often grow up and take wives and have children (again, see the separation). I could get into it, but you see where I'm going.... cross culturally there is no "norm", in fact many cultures have more than 2 genders (some as high as 7 or 8).

There is growing evidence to support also that we're closer related to "Bonobo chimps" than "regular chimps". Bonobo chimps are the most openly bi-sexual animal I've ever seen, and they're smart as hell too, with more ability for language and tool use than normal chimps. Anyways, its very common for same sex bonobos to greet eachother with gentital rubbing, or if one is mad at another, one will basically give the angry one a hand job to reduce the tension. Also group bi, homo and hetero orgies are very common. Since they don't fight alot (as much as normal chimps) primatologists believe these orgies are a social stabalizer mechanism.


Look up bonobos man, those monkeys are sick. And, yeah, we're all bi, or at least we all (I believe) have the capability for it, although culture is very strong and if you believe you're not bi or homo, then you're essentially not.

[Monk]

That was a good post, JCC. But which are the cultures having more than two genders?

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Originally posted by Rogan Josh
I don't think the state should care what turns you on. Neither should I ( and I don't).

It is interesting though that everyone here equates being 'gay' with being turned on by people of the same sex. Fair enough, but then they go on to say that the bible condems being gay as a sin. By their definition of 'gay' this is not true.

The bible condems gay sex as a sin. And whether or not one has gay sex is definitely a choice (unless you are raped). Gay people can still abstain from having sex (or fantasising about it!) and be free from sin (well, that sin at least).

Even better, if they completely abstain maybe they will also shut up about it and stop letting their sexual preferences dictate their lives and who they are as people. The sort of obsession that many gay people seem to have strikes me as a little unhealthy.

I think the bible's main beef with homosexuality is not so much the sex in itself, but the premature "spilling of the seed", since there is no hope of reproduction with two men, and since the the bible is all about high fertility and having lots of children, homosexuality naturally goes contrary to this. The bible, correct me if I'm wrong, doesn't even condone pleasurable sex (not for reproduction) between men and women even.

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Originally posted by Monk
That was a good post, JCC. But which are the cultures having more than two genders?

I can find some names, give me a second.

Navajo are included, they have a couple of "between" genders.

But the ones I'm thinking of are in Africa and New Guinea, I'll find them.

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Monk, this is ripped directly from some University course notes I had typed up, so they might not make perfect sense, but its pretty interesting.

Two Spirit People
a.k.a. “berdache”, which is a pejorative term applied by the French explorers to aboriginal people whose gender category they did not understand. It is a French pronunciation of the Persian word “berdaj”, which referred to the younger man in a “man-boy” homosexual relationship.

Aboriginal terms for Two-Spirits;
In Lakota: Winkte; Tewa: Kwido; Navaho: Nadleehe

Evelyn Blackwood (1984) was the 1st to propose that this role was a separate gender within a multiple gender system.
- not a deviant role
- not a mixture of 2 genders
- not a jumping from one gender to another
- not alternative role behaviour for nontraditional individuals who were still considered men or women.

The role has been documented in 150 North American societies for (biol.) males, and nearly half that number for (biol.) females
Female two-spirits were sometimes referred to with the same name as male two-spirits, and sometimes had distinct names, depending on the society.

-Some 2-spirits adopted the clothing of the other biological sex for specific activities (e.g.., female 2-spirits, while hunting).
-Some dressed differently from both men and women in their society
- Sexual partners were usually non-2-spirits individuals of the same anatomical sex as the 2-spirits, but were sometimes of the other anatomical sex. Some 2-spirits took partners of either biological sex.
- 2-spirits were accepted and fully-integrated members of their communities. Were usually given special respect and honour.
- 2-spirits were frequently credited with exceptional skills, talents, productivity, originality, and sometimes with supernatural powers. In other words, they were non-normative in several dimensions; exceptional individuals that author Colin Wilson refers to as “outsiders.”

The most reliable indicator of 2-spirit status was access to a greater number of economic and religious opportunities than was the norm for other individuals in their culture. (Will Roscoe)
Traditionally ethnographers inplied that people were placed in the “berdache” role by others because they were too weak or cowardly to fulfil their roles as men.
- this is inconsistent with the honour they were given, the esteem in which they were held.
- other males who chose not to become warriors did not become 2-spirits
- that explanation discounts the agency of people who chose the 2-spirit role for the opportunities it offered.

Ethnographers generally have not recognized the importance of culture in constructing the desires, roles, identities and practices that constitute gender and sexual identity. (Will Roscoe)

Gender Variations:

Chukchee - Siberia, recognize 4 genders:
1. gendered male who is sexed male.
2. gendered female who is sexed female.
3. gendered male who is sexed female.
4. gendered female who is sexed male.
These latter 2 genders tend to be religious specialists.

Hua - Eastern highlands of New Guinea:
- minimize the importance of sexual anatomical differences in assigning gender
- gender exists as a continuum, male and female at opposite poles, and a number of genders falling in a continuous distribution between them.
- a person’s gender changes over their lifespan
- gender change is mediated by the exchange of a life-giving substance called Nu, of which women have more than men
- Nu can be gained, lost, or transferred to others, particularly through sexual acts. therefore, women can be dangerous to men and so the males and adolescent boys live apart from the women and girls
- Over their lifetime, women’s Nu decreases, men’s increases, so each lives in a state of perpetual gender change until they reach equilibrium in old age

- Nu|-----|-----|-----|-----|--->*<---|-----|-----|-----|-----| + Nu
Male ga gb gc ...gn gn ...gz gy gx Female

Navaho - S.W. United States
“All things are somewhat male and somewhat female. Even the penis has a little vagina at its tip, and the vulva has a little penis.” - Native informant

Africa: Niara Sudarkasa (African anthropologist) says there is a general de-emphasis on gender in “traditional” African societies, and a corresponding emphasis on status, both in terms of wealth and age. therefore gender can be flexible: wealthy or powerful women (e.g., female chiefs) may become female husbands, taking women as wives and acting the role of the man in every way. The marriage is between male and female roles, not necessarily between sexes. Therefore, the superiority of the wealthy, high status individual over the poor and low-status, and the superiority of senior over junior, is more important than the superiority of male over female.

Bugis - Sulawesi: recognize 5 genders

[Ben Kenobi]

I think the bible's main beef with homosexuality is not so much the sex in itself, but the premature "spilling of the seed",

The quotation you refer to is based on an incorrect interpretation. The problem with 'spilling of the seed,' is the refusal of the brother to fulfill his obligation to his brother's widow. That's the way it worked in Israel, where the younger brother would have to marry his older brother's widow.

From a biblical sense, homosexuality is a violation of God's plan for sexuality. Christ talks more about this, when he speaks on uniting oneself with a prostitute, in the two becoming one flesh.

Procreation has more significance to the secular argument than the religious argument.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Rogan Josh


The bible condems gay sex as a sin. And whether or not one has gay sex is definitely a choice (unless you are raped). Gay people can still abstain from having sex (or fantasising about it!) and be free from sin (well, that sin at least).

Even better, if they completely abstain maybe they will also shut up about it and stop letting their sexual preferences dictate their lives and who they are as people. The sort of obsession that many gay people seem to have strikes me as a little unhealthy.

I'm not interested in the bible, and don't see it as a a good basis for secular society in this century.

My sexuality doesn't determine my life, but unfortunately it does seem to dictate how other people view me (ones who haven't even met me).

I view some 'heterosexuals' obseession with my sex life alarming and unhealthy. After all, I'm not abusing chilkdren or small animals or any varietyof plant life, so what should they care?

I fail to see why I should abstain- I'm not harming anyone, and certainly not myself. But feel free to paint us all with the broad brushstokes of your prejudice.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Asher
If it was natural selection, why are there still gay people?

i thought the general answer these days is that the gay uncles and aunts help support their nephews and nieces, thus helping those nephews and nieces with recessive gay genes to survive.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Monk


I've thought along the same lines. The degree to which you can affect your sexuality could provide for an interesting discussion, but it doesn't have much relevance in politics.

Are you kidding me?? Gay activists usually argue for basic rights based on the premise that our sexual orientation is not a choice.

But I sometimes wonder if it would be a choice (hypothetically let's say), why should that weaken our advocacy for equal citizenship?

[Monk]

Originally posted by MrFun


Are you kidding me?? Gay activists usually argue for basic rights based on the premise that our sexual orientation is not a choice.

But I sometimes wonder if it would be a choice (hypothetically let's say), why should that weaken our advocacy for equal citizenship?

Oh, I failed to make myself clear. Naturally, what I meant was that the question of whether it's a choice or not SHOULDN'T play a part in politics. Just like what you're saying.

[chequita guevara]

Of course it's a choice. Just like I had a choice to grow hands and feet.

[Theben]

But you had a CHOICE whether or not to use those hands and feet.

[Agathon]

What about all those heteros who turn funny in prison? Is that a choice?

[Rogan Josh]

Originally posted by molly bloom
I fail to see why I should abstain- I'm not harming anyone, and certainly not myself. But feel free to paint us all with the broad brushstokes of your prejudice.

tut tut. Now who is being prejudiced?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Monk


Oh, I failed to make myself clear. Naturally, what I meant was that the question of whether it's a choice or not SHOULDN'T play a part in politics. Just like what you're saying.

Ok -- now we're both on the same level.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Agathon
What about all those heteros who turn funny in prison? Is that a choice?

Maybe those "heteros" were actually closeted themselves?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by MrFun
But I sometimes wonder if it would be a choice (hypothetically let's say), why should that weaken our advocacy for equal citizenship?

If it's a choice, it'd fine to discriminate on this.

[MrFun]

So then we can discriminate any other people that are based on choices that do no harm to individuals -- such as religion.

[Whaleboy]

MrFun:

UR:

I choose to be me, as part of my identity, should I be discriminated against because any of those choices?

[MrFun]

I am going to wait for someone to explain to me, how you can justify imposing second-class citizenship on a group of people who make a choice of of any kind, that involves no harm to anyone.

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Originally posted by MrFun
I am going to wait for someone to explain to me, how you can justify imposing second-class citizenship on a group of people who make a choice of of any kind, that involves no harm to anyone.

One word, culture. Thats the only reason you're treated as a second class citizen.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Another bite, hooray! Why would bisexuals view their orientation as a matter of choice?

I'm not arguing Asher's case, here - I was just saying that it makes more sense if you look at it from that direction. Obviously his goal is not to prove that they are all bisexuals - that would be pointless - but rather to try and show they have no logical basis for their claims.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by MrFun
So then we can discriminate any other people that are based on choices that do no harm to individuals -- such as religion.

You will need to first prove that religion does not and did not harm others -- or rather, humanity as a whole.

But I digress. The point here is as long as you can make a conscious choice on an issue, it is a valid point of selection.

Say some restaurants do not accept clients who don't follow certain dress codes. You can certainly argue that your choice of not following these codes do not harm others, but that's besides the point.