Homosexuality and Sexual Deviance

Originally posted by ProjectChaos
Niteboy not sure whether your gay or not from your quote but if you are do you feel or have you ever met anyone that you felt was not really attracted to the same sex as much as they were attracted to "socially rebellious sexual practices" (figured it might be a more fitting term) my apologies is i assumed in correctly but I would still greatly appreciate your thaughts.

There are experimentations that many guys I know had when they were younger. It was just that though, experimentation. I don't think any of them thought (though of course I cannot read minds) that they were doing it to be a deviant, they were just doing it to try it out. If they didn't like it, they moved on. I don't think it was ever really for deviant purposes though.

Intrepid, I know you're following this thread, if that was too sexual, feel free to snip it, I tried to be as PG as I could.

Homosexuals are overrepresented in child sex offenses: Individuals from the 1 to 3 percent of the population that is sexually attracted to the same sex are committing up to one-third of the sex crimes against children.

I'm curious about this statement.

I think it's worded in such a way as to intentionally decieve - it doesn't actually say what it seems to.

IE: does this simply indicate that one-third of sex crimes against children are commmited by members of the same gender? I suspect that's all it means. Not that people who are otherwise largely homosexual are any more likely to molest children.

In otherwords, it's not that people who are otherwise attracted to their own gender are more likely to molest children, but that people who molest children are less likely to care about the gender of their sexual partners.

This is in line with modern psychologists' observations about true pedophiles: most of them are simply attracted to the fact that these are children, and don't particularly care about the gender of the children involved. In other words, they molest boys and girls alike, and don't much care which, as long as they're children.

[edit on 7/30/06 by xmotex]

Originally posted by niteboy82

Originally posted by ProjectChaos
Niteboy not sure whether your gay or not from your quote but if you are do you feel or have you ever met anyone that you felt was not really attracted to the same sex as much as they were attracted to "socially rebellious sexual practices" (figured it might be a more fitting term) my apologies is i assumed in correctly but I would still greatly appreciate your thaughts.

There are experimentations that many guys I know had when they were younger. It was just that though, experimentation. I don't think any of them thought (though of course I cannot read minds) that they were doing it to be a deviant, they were just doing it to try it out. If they didn't like it, they moved on. I don't think it was ever really for deviant purposes though.

Intrepid, I know you're following this thread, if that was too sexual, feel free to snip it, I tried to be as PG as I could.

WOW! Somebody actually addressed the salient point of the thread instead of arguing over what deviant means. Well done.

As a now celibate man who lived the gay lifestyle for many years I have a take on this you may appreciate. It seems to me that there is very little 'being deviant for it's own sake' going on. I think it's more a matter of those who are willing to shun societal norms and flaunt taboos being more likely try other types of behaviors in that same vein. If you're willing to tell society,"screw you, I'm doing what I like" about one matter, you're more likely to do so in other matters. This is a basic personality type differance between the openly gay person, and the many closeted ones who fear social stigma. I can attest to the fact that most openly gay men are of the 'risk taker' personality type.

As to the recurring theme that 'all animals have homosexuality', I'm just amazed. Yeah, males in many species tend to be randy and hump whatever will sit still long enough. What the hell does that prove? Show me a situation where two of the same sex bond for life without reproducing and I'll be impressed. My mothers' female terrier trys to hump the other females when they're in heat. OMG!!! Lesbian doggies!!! Give me a king sized break. If there was a male around she'd be dropping pups all over the place. Animals (like people) are liable to do whatever is neccessary to gratify themselves sexually, but unlike people they do not reject the instinct to reproduce in favor of same sex relationships. This is a psychological phenomenon unique to man.

Originally posted by ProjectChaos
Also can anyone tell me at least what they think about my argument about some not being attracted to males but to deviance?

I refuse to use the word "deviant" when describing homosexuality or same-sex behavior. Not because of the dictionary definition, but because of the more commonly accepted definition of deviant, which has a connotation of something being bad or morally wrong.

I would be much more willing to use the word 'different". And in that case, I would agree that a very small percentage of homosexual activity comes from the position of being attracted to the idea of being "different", "rebelious" or curious about it, rather than from simply being attracted to the opposite sex.

And there's nothing bad or morally wrong with that either.

But if you consider those who practice "socially rebellious sexual practices" to be deviant, then I'm deviant! Because I have practiced my share and more of "socially rebellious sexual practices" during my lifetime. And I'm a woman married to the man of my dreams for 14 glorious (and somewhat deviant) years.

So, now that your question has been answered by myself and niteboy, where is it going? What does it prove? What is your point?

Originally posted by resistor
WOW! Somebody actually addressed the salient point of the thread instead of arguing over what deviant means. Well done.

The term deviant is one of the most important, he actually used. If you do not operationalize what the concepts themselves mean, when you begin a debate there is in fact no debate to be had. As each word can have so many different meanings, social theories behind them and so on and so fourth.

oh pfft...

Deviance is socialy construed.

It is constantly evolving and so whenever you rely on it, you may find yourself and your views outdated. The definition is not fixed and therefore it is problematic or foolhardy to rely on it.

There is also a risk of appearing ignorant.

Originally posted by intrepid
Sure. I did a little checking on your source, it's a lobby group:

www.frc.org...

The Family Research Council has made available an online version of the 2006 State Model Legislation brochure. The booklet mirrors the print version and incorporates well thought-out pro-family policies from around the country. In this publication we have chosen twenty-one bills which cover issues on bioethics, human life, marriage, and family to provide legislators and pro-family activists with the language needed to assist in the passage of future pro-family legislation.

Intrepid, thanks for checking he source out. I was going to do that, then discovered you already had. Whenever I see these statistics, I know that there's a hidden agenda behind it and that it's always "pro-family", i.e. gays aren't considered "families".
These statistics are absurdly wrong. The ONLY groups supporting these kind of statistics are Bible-thumping, pro-family, types. The REAL statistics don't bear this out. In fact, the actual stats prove that homosexuals are no more likely to be pedophiles than any other group. I've read tons of studies on this subject and believe me, your source is way,way off. One problem is that ggroups like these believe that being gay and being a child molester are no different. This is also wrong. Pedophiles like sex with children, gays like sex with the same sex, big difference.

Animals also have homosexual practices. Some same sex animals mate for life and sometimes they try to reproduce. THere was a gay penguin couple at a zoo that sat on a nest with 2 rocks that the penguins cared for, just as they would eggs. The zookeepers, being concerned with the penguins welfare, substituted penguin eggs for the rocks and the chicks were hatched and raised by the gay penguin couple.

THe numbers for the percentage of gays is also very wrong. Most estimates say about 10% of the population is same sex-oriented. 10% estimate is also true for the animal kingdom, as well.

There is a difference between "deviant" and just plain different. Nor do I subscribe to your theory that gays have same sex because they are drawn to deviant behaviors. The facts just don't bear that out. They do not find the opposite sex attractive, but are attracted to their same sex. IT's the way you're wired that's all, no "choice" involved with it.