Sexuality is not a choice, you don't choose your attractions

I agree that sexual attraction may not be choice. The sexual activity and same sex relationships are a choice.

Homosexual behavior is a seemingly increasing abnormal behavioral condition. The cause of attraction can be biological or conditioned. In either case, as a cognitive human, we can choose not to engage in socially and biologically destructive actions.

Some people are born with abnormal attractions or personalities. As they are made aware of their abnormality they can then make the choice to give in to their desire and continue with their behavior or not. Choices are not always easy, and with the human sex drive being as powerful as it is, reconditioning oneself to deny an instinct and follow acceptable and beneficial behavior would be extremely difficult.

Only in the past 50 years or so has the idea of being a homosexual, or engaging in a homosexual lifestyle been growing in acceptance. This because of the detrimental concept of general acceptance and more recently approval of anything so as not to offend. Now is the age of 'everyone a winner.' Kids were once punished for disrespect or foul language. Now, it's just them expressing themselves as individuals. The same with homosexuality. What once was abnormal and detestable to humanity and the species, has become approval of the open love between two people. Well, to the human species, and moral civilization, it is destructive and deplorable.

Yes, homosexual attraction is as natural, biologically speaking, as pedophilia, bestiality or any sexual deviance, kleptomania or other personality disorders. For some conditions, medications help, for others it is behavioral conditioning. It isn't a disease, but it is a disorder.

So again, you don't choose your attractions, but you do choose your actions.

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
One thing I always say to those who say it is a choice.

I ask them to please sit down and share with us, the time in their child hood they decided to sit down, and choose which gender they would be attracted to. To explain how they went about weighing the pro's and con's of each choice and how they came up with their ultimate decision.

Not one has been able to do so.... Why? because they did not choose.... It just happened...

Well, it is that way with gay people to. They do not choose to be gay. They just are.

I agree with what you stated.

Second line

Originally posted by Wolf321


So again, you don't choose your attractions, but you do choose your actions.

Yep,you sure do... good thing it is not wrong to choose to have sex with a consenting adult...

Unlike with pedophiles or people into beastiality.

Yeah, I know you like to try to demonize homosexuality by comparing it to those two things, but you fail to point out the major difference.

Homosexual sex is two adults consenting to sex. Pedophilia is the rape of a child and of course, the child cannot consent. Bestiality is the rape of an animal and of course, the animal cannot consent.

They really don't compare to homosexuality... Not really..

Then your next argument will be, well, if we accept gay people and their choice to have consensual sex, then we will have to accept pedophiles and beastiality....

Well, no we wont... Why? Because homosexuals adults can consent...Children and animals cannot....

Again, please do not go with that silly little argument. It makes zero sense.

Originally posted by PLASIFISK

Originally posted by GringoViejo
reply to post by PLASIFISK

 

Point accepted, but it has absolutely no relevance.

And who's to say that they would agree to do so. I wouldn't have sex with a man if it were to save the human race, I'm not attracted to them. Why should it be any different for a gay man?

edit on 1-10-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)

So you would let the human race perish if you were the only female left along with a single healthy male, you wouldnt breed with him? Wow. Something else is hidden behind your words. Im prohuman. I love all people, no matter color religion or sexual orientation. I have faith that we humans will get it right! And if it came down to me and another woman to be the last hope then so be it! I guess the natural outcome isnt 100% garunteed. Thats sad.

edit on 1-10-2011 by PLASIFISK because: By another woman i mean a woman im not attracted to.

No, I wouldn't have sex with a person of the same sex just to save the human race. I have no vested interest in the survival of the human race. That's why I ask why should it be any different for a gay man/woman? The thought of us dying out doesn't move me, it actually sounds like the best bet for the other life on the planet and the planet itself.

I do not love all people, and frankly I'm suspicious of anyone who does.

reply to post by gimme_some_truth


It isn't a single incident. I could name you several choices I had.
* I fell deeply in love with a girl before kindergarten. I met her at swim lessons, and I pursued her all the way through Jr. High School.
* I was camping out with a kid in about 4th grade, and he propositioned me. I can't say exactly what he asked, but at the time I didn't know what it meant, so I made him explain. Apparently him and his older brother did it regularly, and I considered giving it shot, but I thought I might get in trouble, and I didn't trust him all that much. If it had been a better friend, I might have tried it.
* Later in 7th grade, I won a "Slippery When Wet" poster at a carnival game, and I went home and for the first time, I realized my willy was actually operational. I didn't realize it worked that way, so I had to go ask what the hell had just happened, LOL! I asked my good friend's older brother, and I got a crash course in masturbation.
* In High School I became uber-masculine, and I would've beat someone up for even suggesting I was gay.
* A few years back my tastes became a little more sophisticated and exploratorive and I've learned to appreciate some group participation. Usually that means an additional male or two with a female, but sometimes it means me and several females.
* Even more recently, after a lot of drinking and daring conversation, a friend of mine admitted to enjoying transsexuals. (A very masculine, elite football player friend of mine.) I became curious, so I had to try it out as well.
* I learned a lot about what actually turns me on or off about a person, and it isn't the genitalia as much as the things I like. For instance, I love long soft hair, soft skin, sweet smell, smooth thighs, firm buttocks, lean stomach, and I like someone to either be very assertive or very submissive, I don't like it if they are just luke-warm or agreeable. I also love the way certain parts on certain women look, but other times it can be disgusting.

How would I know all of those things about myself if I was biologically programmed for one particular attraction?

Sex in the Western World is so uptight that most people don't get a chance to explore and they often take their first attraction, first experience, or peer pressure to decide their sexuality. In years past, that meant the majority of people learned to be hetero, these days a large number of people are being pressured by peers and pop culture to be homo. Neither is correct. And it isn't biology. Biology is only concerned with procreation. Anything beyond procreation, including hetero sex for fun is nothing more than a pleasurable activity, I.E. fetish.

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
Yeah, I know you like to try to demonize homosexuality by comparing it to those two things, but you fail to point out the major difference.

Actually, the comparison is in the innate and abnormal sexual attraction, not the actions. There are many people who are pedophiles, having a sexual attraction to children, but have never engaged in sexual contact with children. Just as there are many homosexuals who have by choice, not engaged in homosexual intercourse.

Additionally, I could throw in incest between related adults. Consensual but just as abnormal and destructive.

If you want to argue on the difference on actions as a result of sexual abnormality, I would agree, that there is an issue of consent separating the cases.

Then your next argument will be, well, if we accept gay people and their choice to have consensual sex, then we will have to accept pedophiles and beastiality....

In accordance with the trend developing in society that I mentioned regarding acceptance, then ultimately, yes. Otherwise, pro-homosexual lifestyle supporters would be hypocrites.

reply to post by GringoViejo


Well having sex with a person of the same sex wouldnt solve anything now would it. I agree with you there.

reply to post by mastahunta


Dominance and availability. Where are the gay female animals? What makes you think either one of them enjoyed what they are doing there? I've had a dog try to hump my leg, was the dog into bestiality? I've seen dog's go after stuffed animals like crazy, and the stuffed animal didn't have a gender whatsoever?

Proves nothing. There is no biological use for homosexuality, but there is a huge biological need for sexual urges to ensure survival of species. With no viable female, that urge is overwhelming and anything will do.

Plus, since animals have no sophisticated system of laws and societal norms, sex in the animal kingdom is much different than the human one. Rape is not only acceptable, but necessary in the animal world. Should we use that as justification for our own rapists?

Anything beyond male/female procreation is just a fetish. And that includes typical hetero sex.

reply to post by PLASIFISK


You get the point... maybe. if I were gay I wouldn't have sex with the opposite sex just to "save" the human race. No benefit, plus the whole not being attracted to them.

Originally posted by GringoViejo
reply to post by PLASIFISK

 

You get the point. if I were gay I wouldn't have sex with the opposite sex just to "save" the human race. No benefit, plus the whole not being attracted to them.

Honestly? Because I don't know a straight man that wouldn't have sex with another man to save himself, let alone the human race! Any decent straight male would have sex with a grizzly bear if it meant saving himself or his loved ones, and you are saying you wouldn't have sex with a female to save the human race?

reply to post by Southern Guardian

One of the major arguments against the nature of homosexuality, against same sex marriage is this choice everybody has about their sexuality. How on earth can your sexuality, your natural attraction, and whom you wish to spend your life with be merely choice?

I don't think its a major argument. No one think its a choice. Where do you get your info from. Or do you sit there and make it up.
Dumbest thing I have heard for a few days!!
You CAN choose who to spend your life with, just not who you are attracted to.

reply to post by getreadyalready


Yes, honestly. If you have a problem I suggest you get over it. How would it be saving myself? I still get to live out my life, i'm not in danger of anything. Neither is anyone that is still alive in this hypothetical situation.

If I were gay I wouldn't sleep with someone of the opposite sex. I wouldn't want to, want to know why? Because I know that, as a straight man, I wouldn't have sex with another man even if it meant that people wouldn't go extinct... eventually. If you think that's wrong, that is your problem.

Oh, and as for saying I'm not decent, try not to get so emotional when someone says something you don't like. I notice you're a moderator. Act like one.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


There ARE findings. Key word: Conclusive.

How many years was it before there was Conclusive findings for Malaria - Small Pox - Polio?

In today's world - - money is required to do studies. Funding for studies of the causes of sexual orientation - - - are not exactly on the top of anyone's list.

Then you have the Dr. Mengele - - problem. There is nothing wrong with gays. They are perfectly normal. They do not have a medical issue. They do not need to be experimented on.

Scientist have discovered altering brain chemicals changes sexual orientation in Fruit Flies.

This country still has a severe case of Homophobia. Suppose a parent believes they can "cure" their child of being gay by medical treatments of altering brain chemicals.

This is a very complex issue.

Do we really need to find out why some people are attracted to same gender?

Wouldn't it be better to just accept them as "normal"? You know - - like some people are born with red hair.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by mastahunta

 

Dominance and availability. Where are the gay female animals? What makes you think either one of them enjoyed what they are doing there? I've had a dog try to hump my leg, was the dog into bestiality? I've seen dog's go after stuffed animals like crazy, and the stuffed animal didn't have a gender whatsoever?

Gay men have sex even though there are plenty of available women. People seek out gay establishments
even though there is the choice.

Proves nothing. There is no biological use for homosexuality, but there is a huge biological need for sexual urges to ensure survival of species. With no viable female, that urge is overwhelming and anything will do.

There is no biological use for heart attacks, there is no biological use for psychopathy or depression.

I have gone several years without getting laid, I 'll be happy to report that I did not consider hanging
out with my gay co workers.

Plus, since animals have no sophisticated system of laws and societal norms, sex in the animal kingdom is much different than the human one. Rape is not only acceptable, but necessary in the animal world. Should we use that as justification for our own rapists?

I am not even sure what you are getting at... what does norm have to do with attraction? Let me answer, nothing.
What does rape have to do with consensual, homosexual sex? You do realize that homosexuals engage
in it regardless of all the straw-men you construct?

You couldn't force me to get a hard on over another guy, even if you gave me lessons and paid me thousands of
dollars.

Anything beyond male/female procreation is just a fetish. And that includes typical hetero sex.

A fetish? as opposed to what?

I think logic free theories are just a fetish.

Originally posted by kingofmd
With that said love is a choice. We choose to love our kids, we choose to love friends, and family.

Love has nothing to do with sexual attraction.

Originally posted by GringoViejo
It amazes me that most of us here consider ourselves free thinkers. But when homosexuality comes up, all of a sudden we're to turn to robots and only do things our body is designed to do. Even mods, not so surprisingly.

Why are any of you on the internet, we aren't designed to use it.

And to call all sexual intercourse that doesn't produce child fetishistic is almost the most ignorant thing I've ever heard. Dolphins must be kinky creatures seeings they have sex for pleasure too.

It is a right wing defense mechanism that seems to be popular with libertarians... Instead of being against
something outright, they establish a reason to marginalize the necessity or nature of something they oppose.