Homosexualty

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
There are people who rape animals or a pedophile for fun, but there are also people who do feel attracted to animals or children.

And you can't make them stop feeling attracted to these, like you can't stop any fetish.

What you have to do, though, is to make them stop carrying out their phantasies.

I think people who are raping or are pedophiles just for fun are a very small minority. Usually it's their sexual orientation.
 
coemgen said:
^But you think environment is a part of it? Interesting. :hmm:



i think it's foolish to totally discount that, because there's not a "gay gene," per se, and i think that culture has lots to do with how we understand, in a contemporary sense, what it means to be homosexual and particularly what it means to be gay -- one being an orientation, the other being an identity -- so perhaps in another time, another place if i had no models of what i understand what it means to be gay i might have a different identity, but i don't think that the very basic same-sex attraction would ever go away.

it's convoluded, i know, and all pie-in-the-sky theory, and again, it misses the point, which is that it is most assuredly not a choice.

and i also feel a little bit weird having to justify my sexual orientation in terms that no straight person would ever have to justify his/her sexual orientation.
 
coemgen said:
Is it a matter of simple attraction or sexual adventure? People do all kinds of things sexually. Are they just born that way, or are they just "having fun?" I'm sorry, but under your logic you're saying people who have sex with animals are doing so because they're attracted to them. :|



it's true. i experimented with girls.

rather, i tried very hard to be straight.

but when a naked female body does very, very little to inspire sexual arousal, you know that something isn't right. and when i finally found myself in a relationship with a man there was a huge sense of relief, that *finally* something was fitting and i felt comfortable in my own skin.

do people experiment? are there people with "BUGs" -- bi until graduation? of course.

but that has little to do with what it means to be gay, nor dose it prove, in any way, that my orientation has anything to do with choice or experimenting.

this is an awfully thin straw to hold onto in trying to justify some measure of "choice" within a gay identity in order to, 1) make yourself feel better about having to adhere to whatever so-called Biblical mandates one chooses to believe about homosexuality, and 2) justify whatever homophobic law is currently floating before state legislatures.

if you have to work so, so, so hard to prove some element of choice, is it really all that sturdy an argument/understanding?
 
A_Wanderer said:
Chemical castration seems to do the job pretty well.

OK, I don't really know what chemical castration is (or should be), but at least you can't stop their preferences or phantasies.
So, as I said, you have to stop them for putting their phantasies into practise.
 
Vincent Vega said:
There are people who rape animals or a pedophile for fun, but there are also people who do feel attracted to animals or children.

And you can't make them stop feeling attracted to these, like you can't stop any fetish.

What you have to do, though, is to make them stop carrying out their phantasies.

I think people who are raping or are pedophiles just for fun are a very small minority. Usually it's their sexual orientation.



firstly, neither animals nor chlidren can give consent, so that's why sex between adults and children or adults an animals is illegal.

most people aren't terribly attracted to animals, or if given the choice between an animal or a human, they'd choose an animal.

the same thing with children. because it's easy to dominate a child, it's more of a act of access than of genuine attraction.

also, i wish we'd stop understanding homosexuality and a gay identity as being about sex.

it's much, much more than that, in the same way that heterosexuality is much, much more than about penises and vaginas.

or maybe i'm wrong?
 
Now I agree that there sexuality is biologically based (so as not to ilicit any confusion) but even if we choose or at some stage had the capacity to choose our sexual preference to fit our partner how would it make it wrong? Sexuality is not cause for discrimination and the suspension of rights and that principle applies if it is innate or chosen - it sometimes seems as if by turning it into a "it's not a choice ergo it's right" argument the "it's your choice therefore the state should punish you" neanderthals get a free pass on the fact that their invallid argument would still be invalid even if it was choice.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


These aren't sexual orientations. These are fetishes or fanasies and ARE environmental.

Some people with certain fetishes or phantasies went into therapy.
No therapy would help, they still had these phantasies.

If it was only caused by the environment, I would say there would have been some kind of a "treatment".

And which environment should make you pedophile?
Maybe an trauma, caused by something happened to you or in your presence.
But not the environment as the surrounding where you grow up.
 
Vincent Vega said:


Some people with certain fetishes or phantasies went into therapy.
No therapy would help, they still had these phantasies.
If it was only caused by the environment, I would say there would have been some kind of a "treatment".

Same can be said for some with murderous thoughts, does that mean it was biological? Or maybe it's just we don't have 100% guaranteed treatments yet...
Vincent Vega said:

And which environment should make you pedophile?
Maybe an trauma, caused by something happened to you or in your presence.
But not the environment as the surrounding where you grow up.

:huh: That would be environmental wouldn't it?
 
Irvine511 said:




firstly, neither animals nor chlidren can give consent, so that's why sex between adults and children or adults an animals is illegal.

Sorry, but did I say anything different?
I stated twice that these people must be kept from carrying out their phantasies, being it watching pictures or videos or raping.

most people aren't terribly attracted to animals, or if given the choice between an animal or a human, they'd choose an animal.

the same thing with children. because it's easy to dominate a child, it's more of a act of access than of genuine attraction.

I'm not an expert here, so I might be wrong. That's just what I have heard.

And I think people who are really focussing on children have such a preference, otherwise they would rather rape a woman, which of course is illegal as well, has to be illegal, and will never be legal, as well as I never will tolerate or accept any of this behaviour and so on.

also, i wish we'd stop understanding homosexuality and a gay identity as being about sex.

it's much, much more than that, in the same way that heterosexuality is much, much more than about penises and vaginas.

or maybe i'm wrong?


No, you are not, and I'm not understand it that way.
I don't have an idea what determines the sexual preferences, or when it is determined. I just wanted to give my opinion and understand of the rape thing.

But still, if we take fetishes for example, I clearly think these are sexual preferences, even more sexual in the meaning of sex, than hetero- or homosexuality which is very much about realtionship where sex is only a part of.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


Same can be said for some with murderous thoughts, does that mean it was biological? Or maybe it's just we don't have 100% guaranteed treatments yet...

That sounds pretty much as if you expect me to justify this behaviour in any way, which I do, to say it again, not.

The factors of becoming a rapsit, murderer or whatever are just different. Sometimes it might be a born thing (I would say a serious mind disease), sometimes the environement or socialisation, and sometimes a trauma.
The reasons are different, yet not in any case justyfiable.

:huh: That would be environmental wouldn't it?

Yes, in a case of a trauma caused by anything experienced it would be environmental.

But there might be cases where this preference isn't caused by anything like that.

I can't argue it that much. As I said, it's just something I got to hear, that it is sometimes "in" the person, without any known "cause" from outside.
 
Vincent Vega said:


I'm not an expert here, so I might be wrong. That's just what I have heard.

And I think people who are really focussing on children have such a preference, otherwise they would rather rape a woman, which of course is illegal as well, has to be illegal, and will never be legal, as well as I never will tolerate or accept any of this behaviour and so on.

Just what you've heard?:eyebrow:

A preference isn't a sexuality though, you are blurring lines here. The majority of heterosexual male pediophiles will seek little girls, just like the majority of homosexual pedophiles will seek little boys. Their sexuality isn't "little girls" or "little boys" that's their fantasy.

It's just like some men may prefer blondes to burnettes, blonde is not their sexuality, it's their preference. These things are definately environmental, some are obviously much healthier than others, but the point is this isn't their sexuality.
 
Vincent Vega said:


That sounds pretty much as if you expect me to justify this behaviour in any way, which I do, to say it again, not.

The factors of becoming a rapsit, murderer or whatever are just different. Sometimes it might be a born thing (I would say a serious mind disease), sometimes the environement or socialisation, and sometimes a trauma.
The reasons are different, yet not in any case justyfiable.



Yes, in a case of a trauma caused by anything experienced it would be environmental.

But there might be cases where this preference isn't caused by anything like that.

I can't argue it that much. As I said, it's just something I got to hear, that it is sometimes "in" the person, without any known "cause" from outside.

I don't expect you to justify anything except your view. Your view is that things like beastialty and pedophilia are sometimes biological and nothing proves that.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


Just what you've heard?:eyebrow:

A preference isn't a sexuality though, you are blurring lines here. The majority of heterosexual male pediophiles will seek little girls, just like the majority of homosexual pedophiles will seek little boys. Their sexuality isn't "little girls" or "little boys" that's their fantasy.

It's just like some men may prefer blondes to burnettes, blonde is not their sexuality, it's their preference. These things are definately environmental, some are obviously much healthier than others, but the point is this isn't their sexuality.

See, that's the reason why I didn't want to get into this discussion.
I didn't know there is that difference between the two terms.

Yes, I heard it. There was a documentary once about people with vertain fetishes and who tried to get out of these through therapy. Most therapists said they tried over and over again, but it wasn't possible.

I mean, there also has to be a reason why people cross the line and become pedophiles, and I'm sure not everybody becomes a pedophile.

Also with fetishes, if it was environment, but no one out of the family, friends or other surrounding shares this fetish, how can it be environmental then?

That's all a bit too high for me to be honest.

But please, don't ever start thinking I therefore would understand these people, or tolerate it in any kind.


And sorry for mixing up those terms.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


I don't expect you to justify anything except your view. Your view is that things like beastialty and pedophilia are sometimes biological and nothing proves that.

Yes, maybe I'm plain wrong on that.

That's why I don't like to rely on any TV documentary.

They are sometimes just bullshit.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:

The majority of heterosexual male pediophiles will seek little girls, just like the majority of homosexual pedophiles will seek little boys. Their sexuality isn't "little girls" or "little boys" that's their fantasy.



and as a side note, many pedophiles who prey on little boys do so precisely because of their feminine appearance. they tend not to be attracted to sexually mature men.
 
Pearl said:


True, but it were genetic, then both twins would be gay, not one is and one isn't.
I guess in that situation maybe it has to do with being mirrored-imaged: one twin is right-handed, the other left handed, one twin is the 'good' twin, the other 'bad', one twin is gay, the other straight.

Its a matter of handing down dominant and or recesive traits.
 
:scratch: I don't understand what that has to do with identical twins? Or perhaps you were talking about siblings, period?

Incidentally, an identical twin is statistically far more likely to be gay if their twin is than an 'average' person (including an 'average' person with gay siblings), based on the available studies (Kendler, Kirk, Bailey). It's true that the fact identical twins often aren't both gay is one of many reasons why most researchers doubt there's an absolutely determinative 'gay gene' per se, although strictly speaking, you could still make a case for the hormonal environment in utero having the last word (less than 2% of identical twins share a chorion, amnion and placenta which would be necessary preconditions for 'sharing' a hormonal environment, plus as Ormus touched on earlier a third of all identical twins are afflicted to some degree with twin-to-twin transfer syndrome, which could potentially affect things too).

Also 'mirror-imaged twins', in a medical sense anyway, refers strictly to physical patterns like different-handedness, reverse curling of hair, certain organs being on the wrong side etc., not to personality traits which the cause of mirror-imaging (very late splitting of the zygote) shouldn't affect one way or the other.
 
Last edited:
I believe it is around 50%; it would be interesting if we could touch on the science of sex beyond homosexuality because there is a lot of sociobiology that points to how much of of our sex drive and what we as individuals view as attractive is based on our biology.
 
Back
Top Bottom