It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
When Did You Choose To Be Straight?
page: 6share:
Originally posted by munkey66
I also believe homophobes are those people who have had a sexual desire to experiment with the same sex and it scares them to think they may be gay, eventhough it is normal for humans to be curious.
Not necessarily. Despite the current propaganda, homosexuality hasnt been a socially acceptable behavior in a long time. There seems to be a period during the roman empire where homosexuality and bisexuality were common and even somewhat tolerated. The emergence of christianity changed some societies' view of this behavior hence the current hatred towards Christianity, Judaism, Islam.
to say that homophobia is a result of closet homosexuals is simply not true. There are people who have a genuine fear of homosexuality that stems from many reasons:
1. Not socially acceptable (as mentioned above)
2. the potential for certain diseases to be more rampant and widespread in the gay community. (i.e. HIV, Hepatitis C.)
3. the awkwardness generated in a social situation.
There could be many reasons for homophobia. Actually, many phobias are not rationalized. the definition of the word "phobia" is an irrational fear of something.
reply to post by NightoftheComet
Actually it was all well and good in ancient Greece too. In fact in some places it was a large part of raising strong men from adolescent boys.
Well the studies say otherwise. Statistically "strait" homophobic males will physiologically respond to gay porn whereas those who weren't homophobic simply didn't respond to the stimuli.
It's this way for like almost 9/10 of homophobes, studies suggest.
This one kind of annoys me. It's imaginary. If you're in a room of strangers and half of them happened to be gay (unless they are really camp and effeminate) you're not going to be able to tell who's what. Since coming out to ma friends about a month ago, nothing has changed, not a thing (in fact I'm the only one who has changed).
[edit on 26/12/2008 by Good Wolf]
Actually it was all well and good in ancient Greece too. In fact in some places it was a large part of raising strong men from adolescent boys.
to say that homophobia is a result of closet homosexuals is simply not true.
Well the studies say otherwise. Statistically "strait" homophobic males will physiologically respond to gay porn whereas those who weren't homophobic simply didn't respond to the stimuli.
It's this way for like almost 9/10 of homophobes, studies suggest.
3. the awkwardness generated in a social situation.
This one kind of annoys me. It's imaginary. If you're in a room of strangers and half of them happened to be gay (unless they are really camp and effeminate) you're not going to be able to tell who's what. Since coming out to ma friends about a month ago, nothing has changed, not a thing (in fact I'm the only one who has changed).
[edit on 26/12/2008 by Good Wolf]
When I was a baby, only a few weeks old, they brought me to the doctor. He presented two cards featuring the silhouettes of a man with a woman, then
a man with a man, both holding hands. He said simply, "Chose one." Too young to speak I gestured toward the man with a woman.
At that moment the course of my life was set.
At that moment the course of my life was set.
reply to post by Good Wolf
Yes I also believe I could go that way now too if I so choose ...anyone could .and anyone could find pleasure in either one ..if they so choose to ....
LOL MInx lol ....it really was not all my fault you know ..
Hope you had a great Christmas Wolf ..
Yes I also believe I could go that way now too if I so choose ...anyone could .and anyone could find pleasure in either one ..if they so choose to ....
LOL MInx lol ....it really was not all my fault you know ..
Hope you had a great Christmas Wolf ..
reply to post by NightoftheComet
Well I am not scared of becoming one ..I will only become what I want to become and that is not on my list ......I have enough problems with men lol .............and there is no phobia for me ..
I only have a phobia for spiders and driving a car .....(those scare me bad lol]
Oh and dont tell the Masons this ..but in a way I fear them too ..(mainly because of all they may be affiliated with like Skull and Bones etc) .....
[edit on 26-12-2008 by Simplynoone]
Well I am not scared of becoming one ..I will only become what I want to become and that is not on my list ......I have enough problems with men lol .............and there is no phobia for me ..
I only have a phobia for spiders and driving a car .....(those scare me bad lol]
Oh and dont tell the Masons this ..but in a way I fear them too ..(mainly because of all they may be affiliated with like Skull and Bones etc) .....
[edit on 26-12-2008 by Simplynoone]
reply to post by Simplynoone
Yea it was alright. I stayed at home and did a 'House' Season 4 marathon. It was awesome.
Back to the discussion, think about the purpose of experimentation. It's to learn something, to discover, to gain an understanding. If someone experiments, it's to find out who and what they like- as if they don't already know what they like- meaning what they like is not something they choose if the have to experiment to know.
And not everyone can go either way, most cannot infact. You and I are part of a special (and rather lucky ^_^ wink-wink) minority . You remember Miriam, the good christian woman who is dealing with the plight of homosexuality. She said in another thread that she felt that (from a sexual standpoint) that she was repulsed by men. She, like most people, have preferences that are preset.
What, so you had really sexy friends or something? lol, I know that problem. And I was gunna say "saucy minx" but I figured that I would then be approaching that line and I didn't want to cross it.
[edit on 26/12/2008 by Good Wolf]
Hope you had a great Christmas Wolf ..
Yea it was alright. I stayed at home and did a 'House' Season 4 marathon. It was awesome.
Back to the discussion, think about the purpose of experimentation. It's to learn something, to discover, to gain an understanding. If someone experiments, it's to find out who and what they like- as if they don't already know what they like- meaning what they like is not something they choose if the have to experiment to know.
And not everyone can go either way, most cannot infact. You and I are part of a special (and rather lucky ^_^ wink-wink) minority . You remember Miriam, the good christian woman who is dealing with the plight of homosexuality. She said in another thread that she felt that (from a sexual standpoint) that she was repulsed by men. She, like most people, have preferences that are preset.
LOL MInx lol ....it really was not all my fault you know ..
What, so you had really sexy friends or something? lol, I know that problem. And I was gunna say "saucy minx" but I figured that I would then be approaching that line and I didn't want to cross it.
[edit on 26/12/2008 by Good Wolf]
Gay men have similar brain patterns to women and gay women to men.
It is not a choice to be gay, it is a malfunction of the mind.
Of course you can choose to sleep with a gay guy if you are a straight man. It will probably haunt you for eternity though.
Sorry to hear about your unfortunate circumstances Matrix, good to hear you found yourself a nice girl.
Peace
It is not a choice to be gay, it is a malfunction of the mind.
Of course you can choose to sleep with a gay guy if you are a straight man. It will probably haunt you for eternity though.
Sorry to hear about your unfortunate circumstances Matrix, good to hear you found yourself a nice girl.
Peace
Originally posted by vehemes terra eternus
It is not a choice to be gay, it is a malfunction of the mind.
I disagree with you there. We know so little about the causes of homosexuality and bisexuality, but nature seems to suggest that there are good reasons for homosexual behavior. At this point in time, we know that this behavior is common in the animal kingdom, even occurring for a majority of the time within a few species. This does not support the idea of homosexuality being aberrant or detrimental to species survival. It is counterintuitive to suggest that non-procreative behavior is good for the sustainability of species, but this may indeed be the case; if so, homosexuality could hardly be considered a "malfunction".
Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
Sexual orientation is almost certainly based upon your first sexual experience that is pleasurable. This is so obvious to me that I can't see why there is any debate about this. Sexual attraction is like a drug addiction -- after that first pleasurable sexual encounter you want to keep repeating that experience. (Remember everyone?)
So, if you are indiscriminate about your first sexual encounter, and choose to have it with someone of your own sex, and achieve orgasm, you will probably be homosexual or at least bi-sexual.
On the other hand, if you avoid that first homosexual experience, and seek a heterosexual experience instead, you will probably be heterosexual.
This probably accounts for the high number of pedophiles. I would bet that most pedophiles had their first sexual experience at a very early age, with someone that was very young themselves.
Also, this might be a good reason to tightly regulate homosexual pornography.
Live and learn.
I absolutely disagree with this statement on every level. My first sexual experience was with a woman and yet I am a gay male. Besides, I knew I was "gay" or simply "different" before I even knew what sex was. I would say the awareness started by the time I was four - six at the latest and I have no reason whatsoever to believe I was abused. I have a clear memory of my life day to day from very early childhood three or four maybe is when I started becoming self-aware. I remember things from when I was four like it was yesterday.
~Peace
I became heterosexual when, in the womb, my brain developed in a way that would render my sexual drive to be activated by the female sex.
Originally posted by Ghost147
so your saying that we are born that way then?
Yes
if i choose to grab my wallet on the table and then set it down again then i just made that choice consciously, it wasn't intrinsically printed on to my "soul" that on this day on this hour on this minute and on this second i have to pick up my wallet.
I would define this as an action born from need. Not a choice.
Now, there is not such thing as choice in nature. nothing chooses the way to be how it is, it is biologically made that way.
I am an artist. My mother wanted me to be a doctor. I even tried to be a doctor.
But I couldn't. Did I choose that? No. It was an intrinsic predisposed choice. It was my nature. I did not choose it.
If you are born with 6 toes there is no intrinsic choice being made there, it was a biological error.
How did you get 6 toes? Did you choose it?
The choice was made for you. It was your nature - to have 6 toes.
Choice by nature. Not by you.
[edit on 26-12-2008 by spinkyboo]
reply to post by paperplanes
Ehh well, dunno. Well actually I suppose not, because to nature there is no 'right' or 'wrong', 'correct' or 'incorrect', 'functional' or 'malfunction'.
If anything it's a manifestation of the limitations of biochemistry in gestation. Considering the fact that it's likely always "from birth" then it suggests that when we were made, something went... well 'wrong' or 'not-normal' at least.
But nature is interesting. If in fact homosexuality has a function (social or evolution or whatever) it shows how much things can be utilised in the wild, as abnormal as is may be.
All we can say is that the brain scans and all the other research suggests that it is neurologically hared wired in us. The cause will probably be a multitude of things.
[edit on 26/12/2008 by Good Wolf]
homosexuality could hardly be considered a "malfunction".
Ehh well, dunno. Well actually I suppose not, because to nature there is no 'right' or 'wrong', 'correct' or 'incorrect', 'functional' or 'malfunction'.
If anything it's a manifestation of the limitations of biochemistry in gestation. Considering the fact that it's likely always "from birth" then it suggests that when we were made, something went... well 'wrong' or 'not-normal' at least.
But nature is interesting. If in fact homosexuality has a function (social or evolution or whatever) it shows how much things can be utilised in the wild, as abnormal as is may be.
All we can say is that the brain scans and all the other research suggests that it is neurologically hared wired in us. The cause will probably be a multitude of things.
[edit on 26/12/2008 by Good Wolf]
Please forgive me if someone has broached these questions, and ignore this post if that is the case.
How many males or females on here can honestly say that they have never seen any other same gender person on this planet as being a good looking, cute, pretty?
How many people have turned around and made a quick judgement on whether or not a same sex person is attractive or not?
Not necessarily in a sexual aspect, but just in general?
If a percentage of people are truely in every aspect 100% heterosexual, how can a same sex person make a call on whether or not someone is attractive? We may be the most "evolved" species on this planet, but we are not the only ones who show an attraction to the same sex. If it is so wrong, and not natural, then why are we not alone?
How many males or females on here can honestly say that they have never seen any other same gender person on this planet as being a good looking, cute, pretty?
How many people have turned around and made a quick judgement on whether or not a same sex person is attractive or not?
Not necessarily in a sexual aspect, but just in general?
If a percentage of people are truely in every aspect 100% heterosexual, how can a same sex person make a call on whether or not someone is attractive? We may be the most "evolved" species on this planet, but we are not the only ones who show an attraction to the same sex. If it is so wrong, and not natural, then why are we not alone?
reply to post by paperplanes
Malfunction is not the right word. Someone posted earlier that homosexuality maybe a way of keeping reproduction in check. I never thought about it like that but it makes sense.
If it were just a malfunction then evolution of our species should have removed it long ago, you would think........
Peace
Malfunction is not the right word. Someone posted earlier that homosexuality maybe a way of keeping reproduction in check. I never thought about it like that but it makes sense.
If it were just a malfunction then evolution of our species should have removed it long ago, you would think........
Peace
reply to post by Dark Love
Well (in heterosexuals) it's in our interest to know what the opposite sex likes in order to attract a mate, that's a very academic way of stating it.
We can make judgements on people, but not be "drawn" to them. If you see people on the street whom are the same sex and think 'they are attractive/cute/pretty' that's one thing, but it's when you start to enjoy thinking about them that things are different. If certain people of the same sex creep into your mind and you begin to dwell on their features and traits then you aren't completely 100% hetero anymore.
But that's not the same thing as judgement calls.
Well (in heterosexuals) it's in our interest to know what the opposite sex likes in order to attract a mate, that's a very academic way of stating it.
We can make judgements on people, but not be "drawn" to them. If you see people on the street whom are the same sex and think 'they are attractive/cute/pretty' that's one thing, but it's when you start to enjoy thinking about them that things are different. If certain people of the same sex creep into your mind and you begin to dwell on their features and traits then you aren't completely 100% hetero anymore.
But that's not the same thing as judgement calls.
I think you can choose to be bi-sexual and that is more environmentally influenced. The majority of true homosexuals were homosexuals long before they
even had a clue to what sex was. They saw themselves as normal in their own way and it was the environment that told them they were not.
My neighbor’s five years old is homosexual, and you may ask how do I know for he doesn’t. And the answer is because there is more to the pie than just the sexuality part of it all. For a bi-sexual it might just be the sexual part but for the homosexual it encompasses their whole life, every aspect of it.
My neighbor’s five years old is homosexual, and you may ask how do I know for he doesn’t. And the answer is because there is more to the pie than just the sexuality part of it all. For a bi-sexual it might just be the sexual part but for the homosexual it encompasses their whole life, every aspect of it.
Originally posted by vehemes terra eternus
reply to post by paperplanes
Malfunction is not the right word. Someone posted earlier that homosexuality maybe a way of keeping reproduction in check. I never thought about it like that but it makes sense.
If it were just a malfunction then evolution of our species should have removed it long ago, you would think........
Peace
In nature it is a malfunction, but then there are millions of malfunctions.
It is silly to think that nature would evolve a species and then say it needs some mechanism to keep the population in check. At 5% of the population I guess it not doing so well, anyways starvation is what keeps populations in check. Starvation also allows for the survival of the fittest which is what nature is all about.
reply to post by Good Wolf
My issue with the "something went wrong" or "homosexuality is not normal" argument is that while it seems to be the more reasonable position to take when looking from a traditional standpoint of science, the information that is pouring in at the moment suggests that homosexuality is not at all abnormal or due to a malfunction of the brain. When we understand sexuality to be purely for procreative purposes, the appearance of a sexuality that defies our notions will be classified as a mistake--a failing of nature. But couldn't it be that this is exactly as nature intended it? That it is quite healthy and necessary from a biological perspective to have a presense of homosexual behavior? If the well-being of a species is improved by the presence of homosexuality, as scientists are currently discussing, then homosexuality is not abnormal or faulty. It may very well be good for the species, as I suggested toward the beginning of this thread. This is all I am trying to say--that there is a great possibility here.
We know so little about human sexuality and sexuality in the general animal kingdom. At the moment, we are working our way out of the conventional wisdom of "procreation is the goal". This has been held as truth for so long, but it is apparent that procreation is in fact not the only purpose of sexuality. Understanding this, it follows that other forms of sexuality may have relevance in nature.
My issue with the "something went wrong" or "homosexuality is not normal" argument is that while it seems to be the more reasonable position to take when looking from a traditional standpoint of science, the information that is pouring in at the moment suggests that homosexuality is not at all abnormal or due to a malfunction of the brain. When we understand sexuality to be purely for procreative purposes, the appearance of a sexuality that defies our notions will be classified as a mistake--a failing of nature. But couldn't it be that this is exactly as nature intended it? That it is quite healthy and necessary from a biological perspective to have a presense of homosexual behavior? If the well-being of a species is improved by the presence of homosexuality, as scientists are currently discussing, then homosexuality is not abnormal or faulty. It may very well be good for the species, as I suggested toward the beginning of this thread. This is all I am trying to say--that there is a great possibility here.
We know so little about human sexuality and sexuality in the general animal kingdom. At the moment, we are working our way out of the conventional wisdom of "procreation is the goal". This has been held as truth for so long, but it is apparent that procreation is in fact not the only purpose of sexuality. Understanding this, it follows that other forms of sexuality may have relevance in nature.
reply to post by Shadow_Lord
Pardon? I'm not "just" horny, and I doubt many others are too. As it turns out I have a very inhibited sex drive and so are more interested in a bit of intimacy, love as opposed to dirty sweaty humping.
As it were, I don't have much choice in who I am attracted to. The particular people I'm really 'on' for don't happen to all be of the opposite sex. The only thing I do have a choice about is what impulses I act on, and I don't really feel like only act on heterosexual impulses- it's a choice I'm refusing to make.
Danteslost
It's very very difficult to gage. I for one feel that I'm very close to or are actually in the middle [true bisexuality] but it's subject to change over time and there seems to be a lot of sway. It's almost on a case by case basis [case meaning response to those around].
[edit on 27/12/2008 by Good Wolf]
If a person is bisexual, it is a choice. They are not gay, they are just horny...plain and simple, nothing more.
Pardon? I'm not "just" horny, and I doubt many others are too. As it turns out I have a very inhibited sex drive and so are more interested in a bit of intimacy, love as opposed to dirty sweaty humping.
As it were, I don't have much choice in who I am attracted to. The particular people I'm really 'on' for don't happen to all be of the opposite sex. The only thing I do have a choice about is what impulses I act on, and I don't really feel like only act on heterosexual impulses- it's a choice I'm refusing to make.
Danteslost
No they're not.They are physically and emotionally attracted to both sexes.Also,most bisexuals have more attraction for one sex than the other.
It's very very difficult to gage. I for one feel that I'm very close to or are actually in the middle [true bisexuality] but it's subject to change over time and there seems to be a lot of sway. It's almost on a case by case basis [case meaning response to those around].
[edit on 27/12/2008 by Good Wolf]
reply to post by paperplanes
No, for one very simple reason. Nature doesn't "intend" squat. Nature is inanimate, it has no intentions. However, change in nature (and I'm talking in the animal kingdom now) is driven by mistakes.
I personally believe that homosexuality has pretty much always existed since genders emerged. At such a time it would be a hindrance to our detriment, however the times have a-moved on. It seems now that homosexuality is actually utilised in the wild.
It's a fault, it's not normal but it's not inherently wrong or useless, on the contrary in fact. As you've pointed out it can paradoxically be beneficial to the entire species, used as a tool of refinement.
"Good mistake"
But couldn't it be that this is exactly as nature intended it?
No, for one very simple reason. Nature doesn't "intend" squat. Nature is inanimate, it has no intentions. However, change in nature (and I'm talking in the animal kingdom now) is driven by mistakes.
I personally believe that homosexuality has pretty much always existed since genders emerged. At such a time it would be a hindrance to our detriment, however the times have a-moved on. It seems now that homosexuality is actually utilised in the wild.
It's a fault, it's not normal but it's not inherently wrong or useless, on the contrary in fact. As you've pointed out it can paradoxically be beneficial to the entire species, used as a tool of refinement.
"Good mistake"
new topics
-
We need less laws in the UK not more
General Chit Chat: 1 minutes ago -
Women gravitated toward thugs
General Chit Chat: 7 minutes ago -
The UK is overrun with thugs
General Chit Chat: 17 minutes ago -
The Baloney aka BS Detection Kit
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 5 hours ago -
Suspected Iranian agent working for Pentagon while U.S. coordinated defense of Israel
US Political Madness: 5 hours ago -
How does my computer know
Education and Media: 8 hours ago
top topics
-
Suspected Iranian agent working for Pentagon while U.S. coordinated defense of Israel
US Political Madness: 5 hours ago, 12 flags -
USO 10 miles west of caladesi island, Clearwater beach Florida
Aliens and UFOs: 12 hours ago, 9 flags -
The Baloney aka BS Detection Kit
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 5 hours ago, 3 flags -
How does my computer know
Education and Media: 8 hours ago, 2 flags -
The UK is overrun with thugs
General Chit Chat: 17 minutes ago, 0 flags -
Women gravitated toward thugs
General Chit Chat: 7 minutes ago, 0 flags -
We need less laws in the UK not more
General Chit Chat: 1 minutes ago, 0 flags
active topics
-
Running Through Idiot Protestors Who Block The Road
Rant • 55 • : FlyersFan -
We need less laws in the UK not more
General Chit Chat • 0 • : Anisoptera -
Afterlife, unknown, so prepare, or just go into the unknown (bad)!!
ATS Skunk Works • 52 • : Terpene -
It has begun... Iran begins attack on Israel, launches tons of drones towards the country
World War Three • 632 • : FlyersFan -
Women gravitated toward thugs
General Chit Chat • 0 • : Anisoptera -
Marjorie Taylor Greene Files Motion to Vacate Speaker Mike Johnson
US Political Madness • 48 • : FlyersFan -
America's Infant Mortality Rate Increases for the First Time in 20 Years
Medical Issues & Conspiracies • 19 • : AwakeNotWoke -
The UK is overrun with thugs
General Chit Chat • 1 • : Anisoptera -
NPR Employs 87 Democrats in Editorial Positions
US Political Madness • 41 • : WeMustCare -
How does my computer know
Education and Media • 14 • : AwakeNotWoke