What is gay, straight, bi... All lies? Who knows?

[flirtchewieflirt]

Ok, for some reason I am inspired to make a cardinal error here and express an opinion. I just got around to reading that silly article, ?Gay, Straight, or Lying.? Now I am going to be equally silly. I know this is old news to everyone else, but as Charlie Manson said, ?if I haven?t seen it, it?s new to me!?

The opinion I have arrived at from years of reading and talking to people of various persuasions is a simple one. There is no such thing as gay and straight as we know them today. These labels are nothing more than a result of cultural indoctrination by a primarily Judeo-Christian societal construct. I believe we procreate to reproduce and we procreate for pleasure. I do have not seen any evidence to indicate that humans are heterosexual or monogamous by nature or genetics. I believe that any of the above are simply a result of cultural indoctrination. I find no compelling reason to believe that very many cultures had such numerous issues with human sexuality in general, much less who one chooses to have sex with in a given day, male or female. Even in the modern world, there are still quite a variety of cultural norms displayed in terms of sexuality and relationships in various parts of the world. Anyone who has studied the sexual practices of ancient cultures in detail may feel free to jump all over me on this.

So, what I am saying is that, straight is straight because their culture has programmed them to be so, to accept it as the ?normal? default. This is similar to any number of other cultural ?norms? that various cultures teach their members, sexual or otherwise. Now some folks inevitably rock the boat. It always happens. Some break with indoctrination entirely, but most carry something over when they rebel. Many people, when making such a radical viewpoint shift, become very ?orthodox? about their new viewpoint. Like a religious conversion or a smoker who has just quit and thinks everyone else should now quit as well. They can become just as extreme in their new views as those that they have broken away from. I call this ?new convert syndrome? or ?first timers disease.?

This is where I feel we get gay folks who denigrate BI people as gays who have just not come out of the closet. Straight folks may be hateful or condescending towards bisexuals and gays because they have been indoctrinated to believe that they are going to hell or mentally impaired. They may simply be disturbed by something that violates their cultural programming. Then you have some gays, who have invested a great deal of emotional energy and rationalization in breaking that cultural programming to deal with the urges they feel. Some will feel the need to create their own personal orthodoxy to rationalize their new perspective. They will create it to convince themselves they are still a good person despite their break with programming. For some, this means being just as disturbed by bisexuals as some straight people are disturbed by them.

?You?re not gay, you?re just confused or in need of mental or spiritual help,? becomes, ?You?re not bisexual, you are just in the closet and are really gay and in need of help.? Please understand that I am in no way saying any of this applies to ?everyone? of any particular group, but this is behavior I have observed many times. Reminds me of a South Park cartoon where the goth kids insist that if you want to be different, you have to be just like them?.

That study should have been named something like, ?Male arousal patterns fly in the face of heterosexual monogamous cultural normative indoctrination.? I think that would have been much more appropriate.

Ok, fire away, I?ll hold still?.. LOL!

[DiamondDog]

IMHO you should Stop over analyzing other people's sexuality especially your own, stop analyzing human sexuality, and just accept yourself, and move on.

I know that you're just coming out/accepting yourself but it just causes a bunch of unneeded worry and it doesn't actually solve anything or give you the answers.

You'll be a lot happier, you won't actually learn anything or solve anything by creating anxiety and mental masturbation of your own sexuality and other people's, and there's no way to actually figure out all of the reasons why you're into the things that you are, or why other people are into the sexual things that they're into since they come out of nowhere and we don't have a choice in the matter at all.

In my own case of my own fetishes like piss/watersports or W/S there's no reason why I find men and their urine to be erotic but it just is to me, while with other people they don't like it at all, and some are into just hearing/watching/smelling it and have no desire to have sex involving piss. Or why I find the type of men wearing certain materials/types of clothing, or with certain patterns of facial/body hair to be sexy. There's no rhyme or reason for any of it and I've been like this since I was a child and first started noticing men and even if I could somehow have all of the answers why I'm like this I wouldn't want them.

It's interesting that you quote Charles Manson since he too is bisexual.

There is such a thing as heterosexuality and homosexuality as much as there is such a thing as bisexuality.

They're real sexual orientations and someone's sexuality isn't a choice, it's not a result of programing by a culture/society, or any of the other BS that people say about sexuality being easily changable or a choice.

I get tired when bisexuals don't understand bisexuality even amongst ourselves and when there is a lot of bisexual chauvanism where people will say that "everyone is bisexual", that being bisexual is the best sexual orientation ever and that it's better than being homosexual or straight (this viewpoint reaks of homophobia and heterophobia), or that if you're bisexual that you're on some higher level of human existence or more highly evolved than the rest of humanity that's heterosexual or homosexual.

People's sexuality can shift from being bisexual to homosexual but that's not a choice and it can happen over time. Just like other kinks, sexual interests, and fetishes do.

I do agree with you though that all of the labels do seem so tiring and there's no way to really put everyone into 3 categories and that you can be in multiple categories or shift from one to the other.

Various friends and I have talked about how gender/sexual orientation labels are just political tools, and how some people need/find comfort in them, some could care less, some see the point in them but don't use them, and some use them because they want to or feel like it describes them.

There's also no more a real gay/GLBT "culture" or "community" anymore than there is a heterosexual "culture" or "community".

[<<GOD>>]

"or that if you're bisexual that you're on some higher level of human existence or more highly evolved than the rest of humanity that's heterosexual or homosexual"



This you doubt? We're suprised. Why we consider you to be an excellent represenative of that very evolution! Of course we're on a higher level of existance and it's true!, we are more highly evolved than the rest of humanity. If and you don't believe me,take a real good look :bigrin: at the rest of humanity. Don't sell yourself short my friend. You are great and will do many great things. It's your choice.

your friend
<<god>>

[Long Duck Dong]

to me, sexuality is not about getting the right * label *, but being sexually aware and free

I could use the terms, hetero, bi, pan, gay and celibate to label myself depending on my mood and phase of life... but they are simply interpertations of how I see myself when I look in the mirror

hell I can even add CD/TV/TG to the mix if I really want to......but actually in all honesty...I am just me......

humankind, in its need and desire to isolate, identify and disect every aspect of us of our lives, requires labels......humankind can not survive if they can't label everything from how the sun on ya bare butt makes ya feel, to your arousal and response to people making love in the snow on a minus 30 day

to all life, there should be the undefined, the unexplored, the unlabelled.... can regardless of all the labels you may walk under, or use.......cos the label doesn't matter when you are laying in a lovers arms, eyes half shut, enjoying that feeling that comes from a unique closeness with somebody you wanna be close to.... the feel of their hair, the pressure of their body laying against yours, the touch of their arms against your back, the soft warmth of their breath against your cheek.....as you lightly brush their lips with yours and nothing needs to be said.......

we could sum all that up as love, or the after sex feeling.... etc etc....... but the labels just don't quite express the emotions and feelings involved....and the memories etc etc

what is gay, bi, straight, lesbian, TG.....???? they are simple terms that help people put us in a group......but they do not help people know the true us.... the unique us........ the part that labels do not do justice to

[wutheringheights]

IMHO you should Stop over analyzing other people's sexuality especially your own, stop analyzing human sexuality, and just accept yourself, and move on.

I know that you're just coming out/accepting yourself but it just causes a bunch of unneeded worry and it doesn't actually solve anything or give you the answers.

You'll be a lot happier, you won't actually learn anything or solve anything by creating anxiety and mental masturbation of your own sexuality and other people's, and there's no way to actually figure out all of the reasons why you're into the things that you are, or why other people are into the sexual things that they're into since they come out of nowhere and we don't have a choice in the matter at all.

In my own case of my own fetishes like piss/watersports or W/S there's no reason why I find men and their urine to be erotic but it just is to me, while with other people they don't like it at all, and some are into just hearing/watching/smelling it and have no desire to have sex involving piss. Or why I find the type of men wearing certain materials/types of clothing, or with certain patterns of facial/body hair to be sexy. There's no rhyme or reason for any of it and I've been like this since I was a child and first started noticing men and even if I could somehow have all of the answers why I'm like this I wouldn't want them.

It's interesting that you quote Charles Manson since he too is bisexual.

There is such a thing as heterosexuality and homosexuality as much as there is such a thing as bisexuality.

They're real sexual orientations and someone's sexuality isn't a choice, it's not a result of programing by a culture/society, or any of the other BS that people say about sexuality being easily changable or a choice.

I get tired when bisexuals don't understand bisexuality even amongst ourselves and when there is a lot of bisexual chauvanism where people will say that "everyone is bisexual", that being bisexual is the best sexual orientation ever and that it's better than being homosexual or straight (this viewpoint reaks of homophobia and heterophobia), or that if you're bisexual that you're on some higher level of human existence or more highly evolved than the rest of humanity that's heterosexual or homosexual.

People's sexuality can shift from being bisexual to homosexual but that's not a choice and it can happen over time. Just like other kinks, sexual interests, and fetishes do.

I do agree with you though that all of the labels do seem so tiring and there's no way to really put everyone into 3 categories and that you can be in multiple categories or shift from one to the other.

Various friends and I have talked about how gender/sexual orientation labels are just political tools, and how some people need/find comfort in them, some could care less, some see the point in them but don't use them, and some use them because they want to or feel like it describes them.

There's also no more a real gay/GLBT "culture" or "community" anymore than there is a heterosexual "culture" or "community".

I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding here. The person to whom you're responding isn't 'overanalyzing'; they're the questioning the labels that have been imposed upon us by a sexually repressive/repressed culture. Why is analytical response to a cultural construction a case of 'mental masturbation'?
As to the suggestion that there's 'no rhyme or reason' why people are prone to different sexual practices, I think this suggests a certain kind of sociophobia, if you will; a bias towards individual essentialism whereby people simply are who they are and are unaffected by any external phenomena. People are influenced by any number of factors during their everyday lives. They do not grow up or live in a cultural vacuum. Different sexual practices are construed as normal or abnormal depending upon a plethora of cultural, economic, political agendas and different people are affected/influenced by these agendas in different ways depending upon a variety of factors. The important thing (in terms of moral politics) is that people be able to explore different desires and curiosities without cultural prejudices being used against them, including those instances where prejudice passes itself off as 'analysis'.
To tell people, however, that they need to stop analyzing themselves and others is potentially harmful because without analysis and critical thought, the particular 'analyses' of authority figures and cultural police are in a position to be taken as basic 'reality'.
In response to the assertion that homosexuality, heterosexuality and bisexuality are real sexual orientations, I would say the following:
The desires and pleasures people feel with themselves and each other are real; the love and affection different people feel for each other, regardless of gender and all the other constructions, are real... 'real' in so far as they are experienced as such. The attempt to circumscribe these desires and affections to different orientations and institutions, however, is another matter. What is important is what a person feels for others at any given point in their lives, how they can exist with those other people (or not) and what it means to those people subjectively.... In my opinion, the need to DEFINE those feelings and desires in terms of specific orientations is irrelevant.

[flirtchewieflirt]

I apologize if I created any confusion over the point I was throwing out there for discussion. Please allow me to clear a few things up so that you may better understand where I was going with that pile of opinion.


IMHO you should Stop over analyzing other people's sexuality especially your own, stop analyzing human sexuality, and just accept yourself, and move on.
I know that you're just coming out/accepting yourself but it just causes a bunch of unneeded worry and it doesn't actually solve anything or give you the answers.

I accepted my self a couple of decades ago. Perhaps a little concerned about others accepting me, but I have never felt any particular internal anguish over the idea that I was very open to things that our culture has long taught are perverted and unnatural. I probably did myself a disservice by committing to a monogamous marriage with a woman without telling her about my male interests, but, while married, I did not act on them or my female interests. I chose that relationship. Perhaps not the best thing for me, but there you have it. In any case, none of that had any real bearing on my point or motivation for sharing that opinion. I appreciate the concern though. If I have any anxiety, it is that I might not meet the right person for me. Not that I am not the right person for me. LOL!


You'll be a lot happier, you won't actually learn anything or solve anything by creating anxiety and mental masturbation of your own sexuality and other people's, and there's no way to actually figure out all of the reasons why you're into the things that you are, or why other people are into the sexual things that they're into since they come out of nowhere and we don't have a choice in the matter at all.

I love to learn new things! I study science to learn more about the world around me. I study theology to learn more about people and history. I study any number of things because I desire to know more then I did yesterday for no reason more compelling than I enjoy knowledge and figuring out how and why things tick. Call me out for eating the apple, but I enjoy and accept this about myself as well.


It's interesting that you quote Charles Manson since he too is bisexual.

LOL! I had absolutely no idea! How ironic. In my case, that silly blurb comes from an episode of South Park. Well hell, now I know something I did not know yesterday. I’ll file that right alongside Hitler being a half Jewish vegetarian. LOL!


There is such a thing as heterosexuality and homosexuality as much as there is such a thing as bisexuality.
They're real sexual orientations and someone's sexuality isn't a choice, it's not a result of programing by a culture/society, or any of the other BS that people say about sexuality being easily changable or a choice.

Now we come to part of my actual assertion. Here we simply disagree. I do not currently find any reason to believe that we are born with any particular sexuality other than human sexuality. If that is the case, then I must conclude, for the moment, that it is a choice. That is to say, within the context of my missive posted above, that it is a “choice” to go against the prevailing cultural programming. There are many well documented compulsion disorders and sexual activities can become a symptom of a compulsion disorder just like washing one’s hands over and over again, but that is a whole different ball of wax.

One should certainly not misunderstand that to mean that cultural programming is “easily” changeable. Any more than it is easy for a lifelong, practicing, believing Catholic to suddenly believe there is no god or that his name is really Allah. But that will be the core of our disagreement. I do not think we are born with a default sexuality or preference. I do not believe it is a genetic issue. That would seem unlikely. I believe that “straight” is the default cultural programming in our society and that any other “preference” is a result of some people responding to the fact that cultural dogma has nothing to do with human sexuality. That they decide to step outside the programming to respond to a human sexuality that has nothing to do with cultural demands. Again, as I made clear above, this is simply my opinion, that I happen to have arrived at after years of consideration and experience. I accept that I could be wrong. You never know, and no one has been able to prove anything yet.

Frankly, I feel the movement to label bi or homosexuality as genetic or a choiceless matter of birth is a political attempt to push the issue as a civil rights agenda. Every bit as political as a previous desire to label these things as mental problems and have them included in the DSM. Again, my opinion. If the idea that they had no choice in the matter helps some people accept themselves as good people, I suppose it is a positive rationalization. I just don’t care for national public policy based on feelings. It gets very expensive.


I get tired when bisexuals don't understand bisexuality even amongst ourselves and when there is a lot of bisexual chauvanism where people will say that "everyone is bisexual", that being bisexual is the best sexual orientation ever and that it's better than being homosexual or straight (this viewpoint reaks of homophobia and heterophobia), or that if you're bisexual that you're on some higher level of human existence or more highly evolved than the rest of humanity that's heterosexual or homosexual.

LOL! I can only speak for myself, but I certainly don’t feel that phobia of any kind colors my opinions on this matter. I have no desire to work out how my sexuality is the “best” or any nonsense like that. I have no need to denigrate anyone else’s perceived sexuality to feel comfortable with, or accept my own perceived sexuality. Like any number of other people, I can be irritated by automatic prejudice be it, in my particular case, from the hetero or homo viewpoints. But yes, obviously my viewpoint states that hetero is a cultural demand, not an inborn natural state of human sexuality. This has nothing to do with what is bigger or better or more evolved. Nothing more to it than that.


Various friends and I have talked about how gender/sexual orientation labels are just political tools, and how some people need/find comfort in them, some could care less, some see the point in them but don't use them, and some use them because they want to or feel like it describes them.

I would certainly agree with any number of those statements. Bi, for instance, is a convenient conversational shortcut, but I identify myself as me. Bi is just a convenient way of stating my position on sexuality without a very long winded explanation. Lord knows I am long winded enough as is. I would definitely agree that the terms have a heavy political use and have, in our society, for a couple thousand years or so.


There's also no more a real gay/GLBT "culture" or "community" anymore than there is a heterosexual "culture" or "community".

I would not think so. I’m presuming you are addressing a general idea. I don’t think I made any inference in that regard.

Well anyway, now that the reader is about to fall asleep, I hope the conscious folks will better understand what I was driving at. Again, all opinion, feel free to disagree or throw another stick on the fire!

BTW, well said Long Duck!
BBTW, Wuthering, I thought that last paragraph was particularly well put.

[DiamondDog]

Now we come to part of my actual assertion. Here we simply disagree. I do not currently find any reason to believe that we are born with any particular sexuality other than human sexuality. If that is the case, then I must conclude, for the moment, that it is a choice. That is to say, within the context of my missive posted above, that it is a “choice” to go against the prevailing cultural programming. There are many well documented compulsion disorders and sexual activities can become a symptom of a compulsion disorder just like washing one’s hands over and over again, but that is a whole different ball of wax.

One should certainly not misunderstand that to mean that cultural programming is “easily” changeable. Any more than it is easy for a lifelong, practicing, believing Catholic to suddenly believe there is no god or that his name is really Allah. But that will be the core of our disagreement. I do not think we are born with a default sexuality or preference. I do not believe it is a genetic issue. That would seem unlikely. I believe that “straight” is the default cultural programming in our society and that any other “preference” is a result of some people responding to the fact that cultural dogma has nothing to do with human sexuality. That they decide to step outside the programming to respond to a human sexuality that has nothing to do with cultural demands. Again, as I made clear above, this is simply my opinion, that I happen to have arrived at after years of consideration and experience. I accept that I could be wrong. You never know, and no one has been able to prove anything yet.

Frankly, I feel the movement to label bi or homosexuality as genetic or a choiceless matter of birth is a political attempt to push the issue as a civil rights agenda. Every bit as political as a previous desire to label these things as mental problems and have them included in the DSM. Again, my opinion. If the idea that they had no choice in the matter helps some people accept themselves as good people, I suppose it is a positive rationalization. I just don’t care for national public policy based on feelings. It gets very expensive.


OK, but if sexuality is actually a choice (I don't agree with this at all), why would someone actually choose to be something other than heterosexual?

What about those really old men who come out as being bi/gay finally, after 30+ years of marriage to a woman and kids, and they're in their 50s, 60s, or 70s? I'd think that if sexuality were a choice they wouldn't want this to happen and disrupt their life/family.

I personally don't believe that sexuality is a choice at all and I believe that we're born this way. I also don't believe that everyone is born bisexual by default and then somehow chooses or decides upon a sexual orientation. We all know people who are clinically speaking heterosexual or homosexual and they were born this way and they've never had desires for the gender that they're not attracted to ever.

Eventually they're going to discover that human sexuality is genetic, just give it some time.

What's wrong with pushing bi/gay rights as a political issue or a civil rights agenda? In many countries and cultures GLB people are second class citizens and can be put to death.

I don't agree with the idea that sexuality is a choice because in certain Fundementalist Christian churches (not all of them) there's the whole BS "Ex" gay movement and the idea that someone's sexuality is a choice and that they can become heterosexual with brainwashing, guilt, and fear of religion/spirituality.

[FalconAngel]

Interesting suppositions.

I recommend an interesting book that touches on society's attitudes about sexual preference and how they change over time.
The book is called "The Forever War".

It's an interesting read.
The book starts out with the main character as straight. He remains so throughout the book, but as society changes, more and more of it becomes gay, with hetero's being the (extreme) minority, until the entirely gay population that he is around refers to him as the "Old Queer".

Something to think about.

[flirtchewieflirt]

OK, but if sexuality is actually a choice (I don't agree with this at all), why would someone actually choose to be something other than heterosexual?

Because, if you follow my reasoning, hetero is not the natural state of our sexuality. Of course, even if one does not, you never see 100&#37; compliance in any endeavor. The Chinese have dissidents, teens rebel against the rules, etc. My view is simply that a number of people will feel the pull of their “natural” sexuality and buck the artificial rules. The “natural” sexuality if which I speak is simply a nondeterministic one that is based on reproduction on one hand and pleasure on the other and does not require a particular “persuasion”.


What about those really old men who come out as being bi/gay finally, after 30+ years of marriage to a woman and kids, and they're in their 50s, 60s, or 70s? I'd think that if sexuality were a choice they wouldn't want this to happen and disrupt their life/family.

Some people can take it, they can hold it in. Some can’t. Go a step further and ask about priests who play with males or teachers who have affairs with students. Some is hetero behavior, some is homo, but all of these behaviors result in similar disruption and yet they do it all the same. Men in the situation you describe could have had affairs in secret and kept it quiet. Why did they come out? Were they caught? Did they simply feel they could not keep it in anymore and needed to be able to just be who they are? Again, in my mind, pure hetero is an artificial norm programmed by our society to begin with.


I personally don't believe that sexuality is a choice at all and I believe that we're born this way. I also don't believe that everyone is born bisexual by default and then somehow chooses or decides upon a sexual orientation. We all know people who are clinically speaking heterosexual or homosexual and they were born this way and they've never had desires for the gender that they're not attracted to ever.

If we are all born whatever way we are, no one’s “preferences” would ever change, and we know folks who have “changed”. If “gay” was genetic, it likely would have been weeded out early on as a trait for lack of procreation. I certainly doubt it would have survived as to be as prevalent a trait as it would appear to be. As far as clinically speaking goes, there are a number of communists who have never had a desire to be anything but a communist. Some people take their programming better than others. And yes, I see a certain “orthodoxy” practiced by homosexuals as well. How many women have complained of loosing all their friends over the unforgivable “sin” of going out with a man?


What's wrong with pushing bi/gay rights as a political issue or a civil rights agenda? In many countries and cultures GLB people are second class citizens and can be put to death.

Absolutely nothing! I’m not a big fan of automatic public discrimination of anyone based on a trait or belief. Within reason, of course. Those “all humans must die” folks? Them I would not hire! All I object to is doing it under, what I see as false pretenses. I also object to any perceived attempt to get special treatment as opposed to equal treatment. Lord knows, I know something about discrimination. As a white, male, bi, atheist, I am about the most hated person on the planet. I have been denied employment on the basis of these traits despite the constitution and the EEOC. I have been shunned and harassed based on these traits. I am all for pushing equal rights for all.

I just think it is terribly cynical to try to fabricate a genetic argument to try to equate sexuality with race as a means of defusing 2000 years of religious prejudice. Equality under the law should be a no brainer, but not because of dishonest cynicism and not more than equal. I would also point out that, if you are right, and they someday discover some kind of legitimate “gay” gene, then the psychos will simply have the chance to say it is a genetic anomaly and can be treated with new emerging gene therapies. BTW, if there is a “gay” gene, will they find a “bi” gene? Would it be the same gene? Are bi folks really just genetically homosexual and just have not accepted it yet? I haven’t heard of anyone looking for a “bi” gene.


I don't agree with the idea that sexuality is a choice because in certain Fundementalist Christian churches (not all of them) there's the whole BS "Ex" gay movement and the idea that someone's sexuality is a choice and that they can become heterosexual with brainwashing, guilt, and fear of religion/spirituality.

But they can become heterosexual with sufficient brainwashing, etc. With sufficient mental manipulation I could have you convinced you are Marylyn Monroe. The soviets have been using similar techniques for years. All governments and religions use them as well, to one degree or another. My opinion has nothing to do with whatever fundamentalist churches are teaching. I have my own opinions of them. But, guilt and fear are how you keep holding them by the short hairs, ya know?

[wutheringheights]

What's being largely lost sight of here is that 'sexuality' itself is a cultural construction that attempts to describe and account for the behaviour of different people at the level of interpersonal intimacy and desire. Not all cultures in the world in fact have a concept of 'sexuality'.
One of the things that disturbs me and that I find potentially dangerous about the assertion that one has no choice in being homosexual, etc. is that there is often (not always, but often) an underlying implication that homosexuality (or heterosexuality, for that matter) is only justifiable because people have no choice in the matter; and that to engage in homosexual acts purely because one wants and chooses to is 'wrong'. We should be careful of treating the concept of 'choice' too absolutely. There are different kinds of 'choices' in life which are more or less easy to respond to depending upon the person and their circumstances. Of course, broadly speaking, people don't 'choose' their sexuality in the same sense that they 'choose' their clothes or their car; but how people 'choose' to express and explore their sexuality is based upon various complex factors that are not fixed. The important thing, as I'm sure I've already suggested in one or other of my posts, is that people need to decide for themselves the extent to which the 'reasons' for their choices and preferences are actually significant. I don't believe any one factor or set of factors accounts for any significant aspect of a person's life, lifestyle or psychological/psychosexual makeup.

[flirtchewieflirt]

I think those were a good couple of points, particularly in regards to assertions.

[DiamondDog]

Because, if you follow my reasoning, hetero is not the natural state of our sexuality. Of course, even if one does not, you never see 100% compliance in any endeavor. The Chinese have dissidents, teens rebel against the rules, etc. My view is simply that a number of people will feel the pull of their “natural” sexuality and buck the artificial rules. The “natural” sexuality if which I speak is simply a nondeterministic one that is based on reproduction on one hand and pleasure on the other and does not require a particular “persuasion”.



Some people can take it, they can hold it in. Some can’t. Go a step further and ask about priests who play with males or teachers who have affairs with students. Some is hetero behavior, some is homo, but all of these behaviors result in similar disruption and yet they do it all the same. Men in the situation you describe could have had affairs in secret and kept it quiet. Why did they come out? Were they caught? Did they simply feel they could not keep it in anymore and needed to be able to just be who they are? Again, in my mind, pure hetero is an artificial norm programmed by our society to begin with.



If we are all born whatever way we are, no one’s “preferences” would ever change, and we know folks who have “changed”. If “gay” was genetic, it likely would have been weeded out early on as a trait for lack of procreation. I certainly doubt it would have survived as to be as prevalent a trait as it would appear to be. As far as clinically speaking goes, there are a number of communists who have never had a desire to be anything but a communist. Some people take their programming better than others. And yes, I see a certain “orthodoxy” practiced by homosexuals as well. How many women have complained of loosing all their friends over the unforgivable “sin” of going out with a man?



Absolutely nothing! I’m not a big fan of automatic public discrimination of anyone based on a trait or belief. Within reason, of course. Those “all humans must die” folks? Them I would not hire! All I object to is doing it under, what I see as false pretenses. I also object to any perceived attempt to get special treatment as opposed to equal treatment. Lord knows, I know something about discrimination. As a white, male, bi, atheist, I am about the most hated person on the planet. I have been denied employment on the basis of these traits despite the constitution and the EEOC. I have been shunned and harassed based on these traits. I am all for pushing equal rights for all.

I just think it is terribly cynical to try to fabricate a genetic argument to try to equate sexuality with race as a means of defusing 2000 years of religious prejudice. Equality under the law should be a no brainer, but not because of dishonest cynicism and not more than equal. I would also point out that, if you are right, and they someday discover some kind of legitimate “gay” gene, then the psychos will simply have the chance to say it is a genetic anomaly and can be treated with new emerging gene therapies. BTW, if there is a “gay” gene, will they find a “bi” gene? Would it be the same gene? Are bi folks really just genetically homosexual and just have not accepted it yet? I haven’t heard of anyone looking for a “bi” gene.



But they can become heterosexual with sufficient brainwashing, etc. With sufficient mental manipulation I could have you convinced you are Marylyn Monroe. The soviets have been using similar techniques for years. All governments and religions use them as well, to one degree or another. My opinion has nothing to do with whatever fundamentalist churches are teaching. I have my own opinions of them. But, guilt and fear are how you keep holding them by the short hairs, ya know?

Heavens! Goddess knows the hardships, struggles, and horrible discriminations that white male bisexual atheists have had to struggle against and break free from!

How did you not get jobs because of this? Did you tell your prospective employers flat out everything about yourself and your sexuality and religion in the interview?

Did you put your sexual orientation and religion on your resume or something?

I'm just wondering how this happened? I don't always pass as heterosexual and it's never deterred me from ever finding a job that I wanted.

I also wouldn't say that being a bisexual white male atheist makes you one of the most hated people on the planet just because you belong to these categories.

How have you been harrassed for being in these categories?

It's also a lot easier for you to hide/be invisible with them and you wrote in another post how you're not into dating/having relationships/living with men so if you primarily have relationships with women you're going to be seen as heterosexual by default.

It's like how for myself, I don't date/have relationships with women anymore, I don't want a girlfriend/wife, and I don't care if I'm seen as gay/homosexual but I don't go around nitpicking people if they assume I'm gay or if they don't believe that I'm bi.

Pedastry does not equal homosexuality or bisexuality.

I don't see why you're opening up that can of worms, or trying to equate it with men who start dating/having sex with men and accept themselves finally as being bi/gay in their 50s, 60s, and 70s later in life.

So what about people whose natural sexuality is that of heterosexual? Try telling them "oh you're just programmed this way! You're only hetero because you simply choose to be and ignore the fact that you're not sexually attracted to the same gender at all!".

This argument reaks of heterophobia and it's just like how I've seen gay men laughably call hets breeders or chastise them simply for reproducing or wanting to.

Also, what if someone doesn't find sex pleasureable or they've never had a desire for sex at all like if they're asexual? Or they have no desire to reproduce at all? Or they want to be celibate?

Those ex gays can try to be heterosexual with brainwashing, programming, and fear, but it does not really work.

[vittoria]

Ok, for some reason I am inspired to make a cardinal error here and express an opinion. I just got around to reading that silly article, “Gay, Straight, or Lying.” Now I am going to be equally silly. I know this is old news to everyone else, but as Charlie Manson said, “if I haven’t seen it, it’s new to me!”

The opinion I have arrived at from years of reading and talking to people of various persuasions is a simple one. There is no such thing as gay and straight as we know them today. These labels are nothing more than a result of cultural indoctrination by a primarily Judeo-Christian societal construct. I believe we procreate to reproduce and we procreate for pleasure. I do have not seen any evidence to indicate that humans are heterosexual or monogamous by nature or genetics. I believe that any of the above are simply a result of cultural indoctrination. I find no compelling reason to believe that very many cultures had such numerous issues with human sexuality in general, much less who one chooses to have sex with in a given day, male or female. Even in the modern world, there are still quite a variety of cultural norms displayed in terms of sexuality and relationships in various parts of the world. Anyone who has studied the sexual practices of ancient cultures in detail may feel free to jump all over me on this.

So, what I am saying is that, straight is straight because their culture has programmed them to be so, to accept it as the “normal” default. This is similar to any number of other cultural “norms” that various cultures teach their members, sexual or otherwise. Now some folks inevitably rock the boat. It always happens. Some break with indoctrination entirely, but most carry something over when they rebel. Many people, when making such a radical viewpoint shift, become very “orthodox” about their new viewpoint. Like a religious conversion or a smoker who has just quit and thinks everyone else should now quit as well. They can become just as extreme in their new views as those that they have broken away from. I call this “new convert syndrome” or “first timers disease.”

This is where I feel we get gay folks who denigrate BI people as gays who have just not come out of the closet. Straight folks may be hateful or condescending towards bisexuals and gays because they have been indoctrinated to believe that they are going to hell or mentally impaired. They may simply be disturbed by something that violates their cultural programming. Then you have some gays, who have invested a great deal of emotional energy and rationalization in breaking that cultural programming to deal with the urges they feel. Some will feel the need to create their own personal orthodoxy to rationalize their new perspective. They will create it to convince themselves they are still a good person despite their break with programming. For some, this means being just as disturbed by bisexuals as some straight people are disturbed by them.

“You’re not gay, you’re just confused or in need of mental or spiritual help,” becomes, “You’re not bisexual, you are just in the closet and are really gay and in need of help.” Please understand that I am in no way saying any of this applies to “everyone” of any particular group, but this is behavior I have observed many times. Reminds me of a South Park cartoon where the goth kids insist that if you want to be different, you have to be just like them….

That study should have been named something like, “Male arousal patterns fly in the face of heterosexual monogamous cultural normative indoctrination.” I think that would have been much more appropriate.

Ok, fire away, I’ll hold still….. LOL!

People with the freedom to be themselves, damn the rest...

WoW!


Very well put...

And well THOUGHT OUT.

"Na lig do na mic suiri thu fein a leagan" ;)


V

[FalconAngel]

One of the big issues that so many people get hung up on here is LABELS.

Sure, we don't want to pigeonhole someone with this label or that label, but without labels we have no reference of definition, and therefore no understanding to indicate what we are trying to describe.

I like the term "Bisexual" to describe me. It is a word that we all understand and, at least for most of us, understand it to be very broad and encompassing of all people who are attracted, in some way or another, to both natural genders. To use another term would make someone's understanding of how I describe myself unclear and open to outside interpretation that will, most likely be wrong.

For example; on another forum I came across someone that claimed that they were "gay", but then turned around and said that "yes, I am gay, but I am not Homosexual."

HUH???? I know. I didn't understand either and they were not interested in making it clear.
How can I understand what they are saying if they use their own definitions for words and not letting everyone else in on the secret?

They used their own, personally defined, secret definition of the word "gay" and refused to let anyone else in on the 'secret definition' that they were using in place of the accepted definition.

So, as I have just pointed out, the definitions that we use for various genders and sexualities is how we understand where each of us is coming from.

Some of us do not like the terms "straight", "gay/lesbian" or "bisexual", but they are terms that give everyone a basic understanding of what we are trying to describe ourselves as with enough clarity that they do not have to be redefined for others first. It may need further clarification for detail, but at least there is a commonly understood frame of reference.

So for those of you who dislike labels, you now understand the importance of having them.

[flirtchewieflirt]

Heavens! Goddess knows the hardships, struggles, and horrible discriminations that white male bisexual atheists have had to struggle against and break free from!
How did you not get jobs because of this? Did you tell your prospective employers flat out everything about yourself and your sexuality and religion in the interview?
Did you put your sexual orientation and religion on your resume or something?
I'm just wondering how this happened? I don't always pass as heterosexual and it's never deterred me from ever finding a job that I wanted.

Well, that was just slightly condescending…. According to your profile, you are young yet. That may explain a bit of your bombast. It may also be that you are fortunate enough to have not run into this problem, not done enough job interviews to come across it, or simply not known why you were turned away. In my case, I am directly aware of 3 different jobs where I was turned away without consideration because I am white and/or male. It is very possible that there have been other times when this was the case and I simply did not have a chance to become aware of the reason.

I have not lost any opportunities because I am atheist or bi. I am smart enough not to bring those subjects up and offer yet more reasons to discriminate against me that even more constitutionally nebulous. Especially here in NC in the Baptist belt.

So, all things considered, I’m sure that someone here could imagine how I view your hateful sarcasm. I’m sorry if my opinions upset your sense of order and correctness to the point where you forget your good manners. I’ll try to be more PC in the future.


I also wouldn't say that being a bisexual white male atheist makes you one of the most hated people on the planet just because you belong to these categories.
How have you been harrassed for being in these categories?

Do you watch TV at all? Have you ever seen Baptist protesters outside an alternative club on a SAT night? Have you been to college? We already covered the job issue above. You asked about me, so I won’t even bother relating what my ex endured at work the other night. While I made that particular statement a little tongue-in-cheek, what you wouldn’t say has no bearing on the real world whatsoever. It has made no difference in the past, and I suspect that I will encounter problems in the future, from time to time, dealing with folks who have not gotten your message of, “well, he can’t possibly be harassed or discriminated against. I mean, he’s a white guy and seems straight…”


Pedastry does not equal homosexuality or bisexuality.
I don't see why you're opening up that can of worms, or trying to equate it with men who start dating/having sex with men and accept themselves finally as being bi/gay in their 50s, 60s, and 70s later in life.

I did not equate the two. I certainly do not see myself, or you, on the same level as a child molester. Since you simply knee jerked at the example, rather than addressing the point, I will not bother to delve deeper into what the point was.


So what about people whose natural sexuality is that of heterosexual? Try telling them "oh you're just programmed this way! You're only hetero because you simply choose to be and ignore the fact that you're not sexually attracted to the same gender at all!".

This argument reaks of heterophobia and it's just like how I've seen gay men laughably call hets breeders or chastise them simply for reproducing or wanting to.

This is the second time that you have indicated that I simply suffer from some sexual phobia because I do not agree with your rather PC view of sexuality. Frankly, I begin to wonder if you are, in fact, as comfortable with yourself as you say. It makes me wonder if you need to cling to this view to rationalize the things you like to do rather than simply accepting them and being OK with yourself, whether you believe it to be true or NEED to believe it to be true.

In the case of this question, you are asking the wrong person. I made it clear that, in my view, there is no “natural” heterosexuality or otherwise. Your example of some gays views on straight people just goes to show that some gay people can be just as vicious and nasty as some straight people. But that is the nature of people, regardless of their ideology.


Also, what if someone doesn't find sex pleasureable or they've never had a desire for sex at all like if they're asexual? Or they have no desire to reproduce at all? Or they want to be celibate?

Sounds like a personal problem to me. Lots of people do very strange things that do not fit with various expected behaviors. Outside of the clergy, which I think goes a long way to addressing my point about programming… and yours that programming does not always work… You would likely find some interesting psychology for a few of these folks with a little therapy. Childhood sexual abuse alone causes many adult issues with sexuality, but you did not ask particulars, you are flailing about in the general. “But what about this? And this? And this?” Are you telling me that you believe there is a gene for celibacy?


Those ex gays can try to be heterosexual with brainwashing, programming, and fear, but it does not really work.

Based on who’s statistics? Do you know a guy it did not work for? I bet someone knows a guy for whom it did work. I did not say it was a good thing, but some people are also open to being brainwashed so that they can have the acceptance of their community. Many people change their minds or adopt new behaviors just to gain acceptance. This is not strange or new. Are you making a point or just reflexively disagreeing with everything I’ve said, seemingly without even reading half of it, because my opinion disturbs you?

So far, you have intimated that I need to accept myself, am likely heterophobic, homophobic, and a chauvinist. I have yet to hear you say anything about the reasons you feel I am mistaken. You have simply spent a few posts saying, “you’re wrong man, I can’t believe you said that man!” If you are interested in discussing the matter or learning more about why other people might have different opinions, please feel free. If all you have in your intellectual bag of tricks is to characterize anyone who disagrees with your well thought out position as a whiney privileged white guy who hates himself, gays, and straight people, then I will simply ignore your youthful ranting in the future. If you have not gone to, or yet completed college, I would suggest a political science major. Your debate style thus far would take you far as a politician’s speech writer.

…. And now back to our regularly scheduled program….

[DiamondDog]

Well, that was just slightly condescending…. According to your profile, you are young yet. That may explain a bit of your bombast. It may also be that you are fortunate enough to have not run into this problem, not done enough job interviews to come across it, or simply not known why you were turned away. In my case, I am directly aware of 3 different jobs where I was turned away without consideration because I am white and/or male. It is very possible that there have been other times when this was the case and I simply did not have a chance to become aware of the reason.

I have not lost any opportunities because I am atheist or bi. I am smart enough not to bring those subjects up and offer yet more reasons to discriminate against me that even more constitutionally nebulous. Especially here in NC in the Baptist belt.

So, all things considered, I’m sure that someone here could imagine how I view your hateful sarcasm. I’m sorry if my opinions upset your sense of order and correctness to the point where you forget your good manners. I’ll try to be more PC in the future.



Do you watch TV at all? Have you ever seen Baptist protesters outside an alternative club on a SAT night? Have you been to college? We already covered the job issue above. You asked about me, so I won’t even bother relating what my ex endured at work the other night. While I made that particular statement a little tongue-in-cheek, what you wouldn’t say has no bearing on the real world whatsoever. It has made no difference in the past, and I suspect that I will encounter problems in the future, from time to time, dealing with folks who have not gotten your message of, “well, he can’t possibly be harassed or discriminated against. I mean, he’s a white guy and seems straight…”



I did not equate the two. I certainly do not see myself, or you, on the same level as a child molester. Since you simply knee jerked at the example, rather than addressing the point, I will not bother to delve deeper into what the point was.



This is the second time that you have indicated that I simply suffer from some sexual phobia because I do not agree with your rather PC view of sexuality. Frankly, I begin to wonder if you are, in fact, as comfortable with yourself as you say. It makes me wonder if you need to cling to this view to rationalize the things you like to do rather than simply accepting them and being OK with yourself, whether you believe it to be true or NEED to believe it to be true.

In the case of this question, you are asking the wrong person. I made it clear that, in my view, there is no “natural” heterosexuality or otherwise. Your example of some gays views on straight people just goes to show that some gay people can be just as vicious and nasty as some straight people. But that is the nature of people, regardless of their ideology.



Sounds like a personal problem to me. Lots of people do very strange things that do not fit with various expected behaviors. Outside of the clergy, which I think goes a long way to addressing my point about programming… and yours that programming does not always work… You would likely find some interesting psychology for a few of these folks with a little therapy. Childhood sexual abuse alone causes many adult issues with sexuality, but you did not ask particulars, you are flailing about in the general. “But what about this? And this? And this?” Are you telling me that you believe there is a gene for celibacy?



Based on who’s statistics? Do you know a guy it did not work for? I bet someone knows a guy for whom it did work. I did not say it was a good thing, but some people are also open to being brainwashed so that they can have the acceptance of their community. Many people change their minds or adopt new behaviors just to gain acceptance. This is not strange or new. Are you making a point or just reflexively disagreeing with everything I’ve said, seemingly without even reading half of it, because my opinion disturbs you?

So far, you have intimated that I need to accept myself, am likely heterophobic, homophobic, and a chauvinist. I have yet to hear you say anything about the reasons you feel I am mistaken. You have simply spent a few posts saying, “you’re wrong man, I can’t believe you said that man!” If you are interested in discussing the matter or learning more about why other people might have different opinions, please feel free. If all you have in your intellectual bag of tricks is to characterize anyone who disagrees with your well thought out position as a whiney privileged white guy who hates himself, gays, and straight people, then I will simply ignore your youthful ranting in the future. If you have not gone to, or yet completed college, I would suggest a political science major. Your debate style thus far would take you far as a politician’s speech writer.

…. And now back to our regularly scheduled program….

I just wanted to know how you did not get jobs because of your gender/race/religion/sexuality since you said:


As a white, male, bi, atheist, I am about the most hated person on the planet. I have been denied employment on the basis of these traits despite the constitution and the EEOC. I have been shunned and harassed based on these traits.

I've been denied jobs because of my gender but I just moved on and applied to other ones.

Ageist ignorance isn't something that I like. No you're not one of the most hated people on the planet because you're a white male bisexual atheist. Ignorant statements like that will get condescending replies made to them.

Most people are seen as heterosexual, or assumed to be heterosexual at first unless it is proven otherwise.

Actually I know myself as a person quite well; even the bad parts which most people ignore or pretend don't exist. I'm more comfortable with myself as a person and I'm more comfortable with my sexuality than people who are twice my age are.

No I don't hate gay/homosexual people. I don't like ignorant misogynistic, biphobic, and heterophobic homosexuals though, as much as I don't like biphobic and homophobic heterosexuals who view any sexuality that's not heterosexual as being purely a choice/someone's personal choice.

You're not really showing or proving how heterosexuality isn't "natural", how it's a "choice", or how sexuality itself is a "choice". Your opinion doesn't disturb me at all and it's not that revolutionary either, even if Vittoria thinks it is. She writes and recycles the same boring manic memes for lots of things here that aren’t original. I’d suggest that you not get on her bad side since you will regret it. You may get accused of being things that you’re not, not being PC, or doing things that you simply did not do at all by her.

Anyway, I'm not really sure where you're going with this topic/argument since it jumps all over the place and doesn't prove or show anything that you’re trying to show as being factual.

All you're really doing is turning around the heterosexist idea that any sexuality besides being heterosexual is clearly a choice, and turning it back on heterosexuals. Not very clever and nobody will take it seriously, especially the people who you’re trying to say are somehow “programmed” or “choose” their sexuality.

Yes I have been to university, a very good one. I did not study Political Science. I've also worked at colleges/universities and I've presented papers at academic conferences.

The south isn't all that bad and I've lived in rural areas in the middle of nowhere that were A LOT more open and accepting of GLBT people than cities/urban areas are assumed be.

I’ve also never seen Baptists protesting outside of a gay/mixed crowd bars/clubs since they have better things to do, bar/club owners/managers would tell them to kindly fuck off, and most people don’t take them or what they say seriously.

I avoid watching as much TV as I can. If you think I’m being PC you haven’t read other posts written by others here.

Also not all Baptists are bad people or hate us queer people. I'm out to Baptist friends of mine and they're fine with me and they’ve even shared a bed (non sexually, as they’re heterosexual men) with me when we’ve traveled.

Look up the studies done on the "ex" gay therapy and read about how prominent people that swore that it worked and were poster children for it relapsed and now denounce it. The suicide rate among GLBT teenagers who go through this sort of “ex” gay therapy is also very high.

[bisexualinsocal]

Ok, for some reason I am inspired to make a cardinal error here and express an opinion. I just got around to reading that silly article, “Gay, Straight, or Lying.” Now I am going to be equally silly. I know this is old news to everyone else, but as Charlie Manson said, “if I haven’t seen it, it’s new to me!”

The opinion I have arrived at from years of reading and talking to people of various persuasions is a simple one. There is no such thing as gay and straight as we know them today. These labels are nothing more than a result of cultural indoctrination by a primarily Judeo-Christian societal construct. I believe we procreate to reproduce and we procreate for pleasure. I do have not seen any evidence to indicate that humans are heterosexual or monogamous by nature or genetics. I believe that any of the above are simply a result of cultural indoctrination. I find no compelling reason to believe that very many cultures had such numerous issues with human sexuality in general, much less who one chooses to have sex with in a given day, male or female. Even in the modern world, there are still quite a variety of cultural norms displayed in terms of sexuality and relationships in various parts of the world. Anyone who has studied the sexual practices of ancient cultures in detail may feel free to jump all over me on this.

So, what I am saying is that, straight is straight because their culture has programmed them to be so, to accept it as the “normal” default. This is similar to any number of other cultural “norms” that various cultures teach their members, sexual or otherwise. Now some folks inevitably rock the boat. It always happens. Some break with indoctrination entirely, but most carry something over when they rebel. Many people, when making such a radical viewpoint shift, become very “orthodox” about their new viewpoint. Like a religious conversion or a smoker who has just quit and thinks everyone else should now quit as well. They can become just as extreme in their new views as those that they have broken away from. I call this “new convert syndrome” or “first timers disease.”

This is where I feel we get gay folks who denigrate BI people as gays who have just not come out of the closet. Straight folks may be hateful or condescending towards bisexuals and gays because they have been indoctrinated to believe that they are going to hell or mentally impaired. They may simply be disturbed by something that violates their cultural programming. Then you have some gays, who have invested a great deal of emotional energy and rationalization in breaking that cultural programming to deal with the urges they feel. Some will feel the need to create their own personal orthodoxy to rationalize their new perspective. They will create it to convince themselves they are still a good person despite their break with programming. For some, this means being just as disturbed by bisexuals as some straight people are disturbed by them.

“You’re not gay, you’re just confused or in need of mental or spiritual help,” becomes, “You’re not bisexual, you are just in the closet and are really gay and in need of help.” Please understand that I am in no way saying any of this applies to “everyone” of any particular group, but this is behavior I have observed many times. Reminds me of a South Park cartoon where the goth kids insist that if you want to be different, you have to be just like them….

That study should have been named something like, “Male arousal patterns fly in the face of heterosexual monogamous cultural normative indoctrination.” I think that would have been much more appropriate.

Ok, fire away, I’ll hold still….. LOL!

Way too much information here. I'm bi and if a gay accuses me of being gay, I stop and think to myself "What a bigoted moron" and I move on. When I was straight, I would think the same thing.

I don't waste time with idiots unless I am pointing my finger and ridiculing them (which is incredibly fun!). I'm bi, it's a nice word and I love labels. Life is like that sometimes.

[the mage]

Every single human body is able to enjoy sex with any other human (or other species) body it meets.
The physical capability is there.
The unconscious drivers which cause arousal are the area in which your nature overrides your nurture. You do not have choice.
It is the people who attempt to deride you for your natural state of being or who damage themselves and others in their denial of access to sex of choice who cause hurt.

[flirtchewieflirt]

I take it back. You offer up some comments that would offer an opportunity for a little discussion. Let’s see where we can go with this.


Most people are seen as heterosexual, or assumed to be heterosexual at first unless it is proven otherwise.

Why?


….as much as I don't like biphobic and homophobic heterosexuals who view any sexuality that's not heterosexual as being purely a choice/someone's personal choice.

So anyone who does not accept the currently fashionable genetic argument for “deviant” sexual behavior is just a bigot? I remember a time when one was consider quite the ignorant degenerate if one did not accept the, then fashionable, argument that any sexual behavior outside of hetero was a mental illness and listed as such in the DSM.


You're not really showing or proving how heterosexuality isn't "natural", how it's a "choice", or how sexuality itself is a "choice".

Anyway, I'm not really sure where you're going with this topic/argument since it jumps all over the place and doesn't prove or show anything that you’re trying to show as being factual.

This is one of the reasons I feel that you are not really reading these posts or giving any thought to the ideas expressed. I have used words such as opinion, view, and reasoning throughout my posts. I have, at no point, claimed to have discovered the absolute scientific answer as to why we are the way we are. If you want proof, discussing theology and human psychology will not get you very far. Another thing I don’t understand is why, if you are so convinced I am wrong, why are you arguing with me at all. You could have boiled all that text and quote space down to, “you’re wrong, so there,” and moved on to another thread.

Are you trying to save the small minded, easily impressionable folks around here from my phobic and heretical opinions? Are you trying to see to it that I don’t sway the feeble minded? I was simply interested in a discussion of views on the subject. Rather then adding to that discussion, you have simply decried the opinion and attacked the opinion holder, as if attacking the person with the opinion will automatically invalidate the ideas. This is why I suggested politics as a career choice.

Rather than all that, why don’t you simply try articulating your opinion and what leads you to believe your opinion is more likely to be correct. Debate, critical thinking skills. If you believe in your position so strongly, articulate it and spare us your list of people and opinions you don’t like. Rather than saying, “I don’t like people like that,” over and over again, why don’t you address the ideas you disagree with and articulate your reasons for disagreeing? That would bring a discussion rather than a litany of who and what you don’t like. So tell us what you think, not what you hate or dislike. So you seem to believe that all sexual behavior is genetic and beyond any conscious control of the individual. Is this correct? Do you also believe there is a bi gene, or a gene for latex, or a gene for child abuse, or bestiality, or anything else? Tell us what you believe and why.


All you're really doing is turning around the heterosexist idea that any sexuality besides being heterosexual is clearly a choice, and turning it back on heterosexuals. Not very clever and nobody will take it seriously, especially the people who you’re trying to say are somehow “programmed” or “choose” their sexuality.

Why? Once again, if my opinion is so corrupt, feel free to explain yours and why you feel it is more likely to be correct. I don’t think it is that simplistic at all, and any worthwhile study of behavior modification, torture, and “groupthink” experiments will provide a basis for a reasonable argument in favor of my assertion. It has not a thing to do with phobias. Again, rather than simply dismissing the opinions of others, state your own and articulate your reasoning. Then this will be a discussion, rather than an endless litany of, “no it’s not.”


The south isn't all that bad and I've lived in rural areas in the middle of nowhere that were A LOT more open and accepting of GLBT people than cities/urban areas are assumed be.

I’ve also never seen Baptists protesting outside of a gay/mixed crowd bars/clubs since they have better things to do, bar/club owners/managers would tell them to kindly fuck off, and most people don’t take them or what they say seriously.

Also not all Baptists are bad people or hate us queer people. I'm out to Baptist friends of mine and they're fine with me and they’ve even shared a bed (non sexually, as they’re heterosexual men) with me when we’ve traveled.

Well, that’s a relief…. Yet another problem I am having. You have a well developed tendency to argue from a specific item to a massive generalization. So, you haven’t seen it so it never existed. Well thank goodness it was all in my imagination. There really was not anyone there chanting or harassing or taking down license plate numbers. I was just confused.

Not all Baptists are bad people. Did someone say that? Did anyone accuse every member of the various Baptist churches or being violent religious bigots? I must have missed that. I did mention that I have come across a few. Now you have jumped off and expanded that to all Baptists, or not ALL Baptists. Well, despite having you assure me otherwise, I am not about to suddenly go on about my sexuality or religious views in a crowd of Baptists. No one said they were all assholes who feel justified in harming another human being in the name of their beliefs, but I know for a fact that some do. Just like any other crowd of humans, there will be some who are just mean and ugly.


Look up the studies done on the "ex" gay therapy and read about how prominent people that swore that it worked and were poster children for it relapsed and now denounce it. The suicide rate among GLBT teenagers who go through this sort of “ex” gay therapy is also very high.

I don’t need to look them up. It happens. The suicide rate for victims of behavior modification programs of many types jumps noticeably. This sort of ideological brainwashing has all sorts of nasty effects associated with it, be it political, religious, or anything else along down the line. You are telling me this as though you are trying to convince me that these things are bad. No kidding. If the reprogramming is forced, it can get quite awful, even if the subject is willing for the sake of acceptance, it can still get ugly. Sometimes it does not. Very few things are 100% in this world.

The difference is, you seem to be saying that this example is indicative that sexual preferences are genetic and immutable. Quite to the contrary, I think this phenomenon is a strong argument for programming of societal sexual norms being the driving force of sexuality, not genetics. That “deviant” behavior is a phenomenon of breaking the programming, rather than some gene that makes you like guys instead of girls. You can find similar examples of the same psychological phenomenon in other areas where behavior modification and groupthink is applied. If you simply remove the reference to homosexuality in this example, you would be telling the story of any number of victims who have suffered the same, just not because of sexuality.

If all you want to do is throw ad hominem under the bus or plant a field of strawmen, knock yourself out. Use the words fear and phobia all you want. I’m not particularly concerned with who may take me seriously or not, it is supposed to be a discussion. You seem to be the only one concerned with who is phobic or being taken seriously so far. I still have yet to hear what you think and why. I have only heard what you don’t like.

As a matter of having an interesting discussion, I would still like to hear your views and what you feel supports those views.