Homosexuality.

Anything to do with gender and the status of women and men.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Dontaskme wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Really? It's all just a figment of the imagination? If they aren't like that then why aren't they protesting about the way they are portrayed, or portray themselves? It is, after all, one of the strongest lobby groups in the world.
Okay, well all I'm saying is that not all Gays are like what society portrays them to be. And perhaps some of them feel a little insecure about their role and place in society so then exercise their free will in forming lobby groups and such...that'll wear off as soon as they gain more confidence in themselves.
Which is why I didn't say 'all'. Stephen Fry isn't like that.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by Dontaskme »

Harbal wrote: I can't help wondering how God feels about this.
''I guess now that makes me even more weirder than you Harbal.''
Harbal wrote:It's not for me to say but I certainly hope so.
Well, here, I'll show you exactly how God feels about this...savvy this >

Image
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by Dontaskme »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Which is why I didn't say 'all'. Stephen Fry isn't like that.
Well of course, but we always judge what we don't understand. The gays are only going through a temporary state of confusion due to societies expectation of what defines normal... but what the heck is normal these days, gays have absolutely nothing to worry about in that respect.

Perhaps they feel they need to act like you mentioned earlier in order to be accepted because that too is what they believe is how they should behave. When in reality they must already know that it's much easier to just be your normal self, and that they don't have to put on an act.

But I suppose if they just act normally, then when all of a sudden they start kissing, imagine the shock on peoples face, they wouldn't have seen that coming, so I'm guessing they put on the act of gayish behavior as to signal to others that they are a little bit different and in doing that will gain more acceptance. It must be very hard for them you know to fit into to societies expectations.
Last edited by Dontaskme on Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9557
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by Harbal »

Dontaskme wrote: but would have a problem if a human openly had sex with an animal in public...
Well I wasn't advocating the live and let live principle to that extent, Dontaskme, I think I too would have to draw the line there.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by Dontaskme »

Harbal wrote:
Dontaskme wrote: but would have a problem if a human openly had sex with an animal in public...
Well I wasn't advocating the live and let live principle to that extent, Dontaskme, I think I too would have to draw the line there.
Okay good, because there are boundaries that humans should not ever consider crossing else we descend into absolute chaos as an evolving species...but then what is it exactly that you find distasteful about another persons preference that makes you want to judge it negatively, I don't quite get that?
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9557
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by Harbal »

Dontaskme wrote:but then what is it exactly that you find distasteful about another persons preference that makes you want to judge it negatively, I don't quite get that?
As far as things like the subject of this thread are concerned, I don't want to judge it, it's not doing me any harm so I'm quite indifferent to it.
Dubious
Posts: 4000
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by Dubious »

You're programmed by your hormones. It's not a matter of either/or and 'choosing' is not an option. If you're programmed to have sex with an iguana, guess what!
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Dubious wrote:You're programmed by your hormones. It's not a matter of either/or and 'choosing' is not an option. If you're programmed to have sex with an iguana, guess what!
It might be a 'choice' sometimes. But so what? I don't see how that affects anything except apparently to religious nuts. But they don't think anyway.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by Greta »

Harbal wrote:The thought of having a sexually physical relationship with someone of the same sex as me is something I find distasteful. Does this mean I should condemn homosexuality? The thing is: I quite often encounter people of the opposite sex to me with whom the thought of having a sexually physical relationship is equally distasteful. Does this mean I should, at least to some extent, condemn heterosexuality?
In anticipation of the probable response to this: yes, I'm sure there are many people, of both sexes, who would find the thought of having a sexually physical relationship with me rather unpalatable.
For Jewish tribes living amongst hostile Arabs and Persians, it was a matter of "populate or perish". Whatever one's inclinations, everyone was needed to help keep numbers up. Today, "less is more" would seem more applicable but unchanging dogmas cannot adapt to changing circumstances.

When you think about it, sex per se is gross, although not as intrinsically disgusting as eating and excreting. Gendered bags of goop encased in a pretty candy coating (aka skin) slobbering over each other in repetitive, genetically programmed behaviours. Not wildly dignified behaviour, no matter the type of sex.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by Dontaskme »

Greta wrote:
When you think about it, sex per se is gross, although not as intrinsically disgusting as eating and excreting. Gendered bags of goop encased in a pretty candy coating (aka skin) slobbering over each other in repetitive, genetically programmed behaviours. Not wildly dignified behaviour, no matter the type of sex.
I think humans seem to be pleasure seeking creatures and is why they indulge so much importance in sex with another. No thought for any poor offspring that may come as a result ...humans are basically selfish really..and in pursuit of their own pleasure they're just adding more human suffering and misery to the world...it's a crazy game.

And yeah, we're all just bags of puss and sick and gunge ...we gaze lovingly into the balls of puss and blood and actually believe there is someone behind them that loves us...no they don't love you, they're just using you to get what they want, in truth they don't give a fuck about you...what a joke! :lol:
uwot
Posts: 6093
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by uwot »

Dontaskme wrote:And yeah, we're all just bags of puss and sick and gunge ...we gaze lovingly into the balls of puss and blood and actually believe there is someone behind them that loves us...no they don't love you, they're just using you to get what they want, in truth they don't give a fuck about you...what a joke! :lol:
So I take it things haven't worked out great on the personal relationship level. Has it ever crossed your mind, that perhaps this explains your denial of individuality?
uwot
Posts: 6093
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by uwot »

Forgot to say; why on Earth does anyone care what consenting adults do to each other? This really isn't my field, but from what I hear, there are much more extraordinary things that people do amongst themselves than simply doing it to someone with the same tackle.
tbieter
Posts: 1206
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:45 pm
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota, USA

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by tbieter »

Dontaskme wrote:
Harbal wrote:The thought of having a sexually physical relationship with someone of the same sex as me is something I find distasteful. Does this mean I should condemn homosexuality? The thing is: I quite often encounter people of the opposite sex to me with whom the thought of having a sexually physical relationship is equally distasteful. Does this mean I should, at least to some extent, condemn heterosexuality?
In anticipation of the probable response to this: yes, I'm sure there are many people, of both sexes, who would find the thought of having a sexually physical relationship with me rather unpalatable.
Perhaps you find it same sex sex ..and or opposite sex sex distasteful because you are resisting the reality of it. And you can't quite deal with the true reality that sex is a natural function of nature and nothing can be done to stop the situation?
Herbal's sense of repugnance toward the thought is also natural. The philosopher, Yves Simon, suggested that this reaction was some evidence supporting the existence of a natural law. The person is supposed to infer a wrongness of the homosexual act from the repugnance.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9557
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by Harbal »

tbieter wrote: Harbal's sense of repugnance toward the thought is also natural.
I don't find homosexuality repugnant, I merely find the thought of participating in the physical side of it distasteful.
The person is supposed to infer a wrongness of the homosexual act from the repugnance.
I think fish paste is repugnant, does that entitle me to insist that no one else may eat it?

I also think interfering with people's wellbeing simply because their lifestyle doesn't appeal to me is repugnant.
uwot
Posts: 6093
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Homosexuality.

Post by uwot »

tbieter wrote:Herbal's sense of repugnance toward the thought is also natural. The philosopher, Yves Simon, suggested that this reaction was some evidence supporting the existence of a natural law. The person is supposed to infer a wrongness of the homosexual act from the repugnance.
Yeah, but Yves Simon was a catholic apologist, which will be why you've heard of him; as such he found sex outside of marriage equally repugnant.
Post Reply