Welcome to Gaia! ::

vwytche's avatar

Ruthless Survivor

9,400 Points
  • Forum Sophomore 300
  • Signature Look 250
  • Dressed Up 200
rolleyes You know what's unatural? Being odsessed with what other people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. Homophobe bible thumpers think about gay sex more than gay people do. confused
vwytche
rolleyes You know what's unatural? Being odsessed with what other people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. Homophobe bible thumpers think about gay sex more than gay people do. confused


People can't choose where to be gay.
- talk2hand
vwytche's avatar

Ruthless Survivor

9,400 Points
  • Forum Sophomore 300
  • Signature Look 250
  • Dressed Up 200
Lucky~9~Lives
vwytche
rolleyes You know what's unatural? Being odsessed with what other people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. Homophobe bible thumpers think about gay sex more than gay people do. confused


People can't choose where to be gay.
- talk2hand


That raises an interesting question. Are these nosy zealots concerned about being gay, or just gay sex? I mean, if a guy is gay but only has sex with a woman, is that all right with them? Or is he still "unaurtal" and worthy of scorn just by merit of exsisting?

Any of the anti-gay right want to answer that one? What's the problem, being gay, or acting on it?
Golden Black Tea's avatar

1,800 Points
  • Hygienic 200
  • Dressed Up 200
  • Signature Look 250
Fermionic
Jfigu1008
Fermionic
Jfigu1008
Fermionic


It happens in nature, homosexual tendencies in both humans and animals are easy to observe. And to suggest that it is un-natural is to insinuate that it is, in someway, synthetic or supernatural (genetic defects, if one is to class it such, are still very natural, you see).
About it being synthetic or supernatural;
To assume that it is supernatural is silly; there is no way to validate that.
To think it is synthetic is somewhat overestimating human's ability to change human sexuality, as there have been no such sucessful attempts at that.
That it goes against a natural order [of reproduction] it doesn't make it unnatural.


Thanks, but a few more questions. I agree that it does happen in nature. We can see this in people and in animals. However, concerning the last sentence you noted how if something goes against natural order, that it doesn't make it unnatural. But how can that be?

If I went and did something that was against the natural, then wouldn't that automatically make the very act that I partake in unnatural? I know it's really a semantic issue, but clarify if you could.

Now I'm no scientist, and again, I'm fairly new to the topic so guidance would be truly appreciated. But if our genes dictate ones gender on the physical level, then why does it apparently not do so on others? I see many people who are physically one way, yet claim to be the other. Most of the time it seems to be based off of ones own feelings (again, this is only my speculation), so what gives?


I retract that last sentence. It goes against a trend.


So as far as reproduction goes, it's unnatural? I mean, it would have to be as far as reproduction goes...

And could you please address my last paragraph? I mean, if your not sure then that's ok. There's a world of information I can get through other means.


The human mind is a complicated thing that people do not understand. That is the answer. We do not know, and we should not make bold and degrading claims about people who do not describe themselves as heterosexual, based on the fact that we have no clear idea why.


A bold statement to me would be to say that I were a female if I were physically male. Just because I feel like a girl doesn't automatically make me one. I know that may sound offensive but I have a hard time understanding how this logic holds itself up.

Correct me if I'm mistaken but this is what I observe. A man say's on the inside he is a woman because of several factors (as with most things, it's a combination of reasons), but these factors are dependant on ones own feelings (objective), and what is culturally implied (barbie=girl, batman=boy). But if a person uses these to justify what gender they think they are, then isn't it just a claim based off of subjectivity and cultural implication and nothing more? If this is true, then these claims don't hold much weight. They are purely subjective.

Please don't be offended. I am inclined to seek to the bottom of the barrel. What do you think?
WaRori-Chan
deadmanjay
Lucky~9~Lives
Cadasa52
We arn't animals-it is unnatural-its an evolution killer in men; you can't reproduce..


Homosexual =/= infertile.


Yer wrong, cause obviously no gay man has ever fathered children. Obviously. 3nodding


Doesn't mean they're infertile. They can still have kids, they just choose not to. What's your point?



You missed it. 3nodding
Jfigu1008
Fermionic
Jfigu1008
Fermionic
Jfigu1008
Fermionic


It happens in nature, homosexual tendencies in both humans and animals are easy to observe. And to suggest that it is un-natural is to insinuate that it is, in someway, synthetic or supernatural (genetic defects, if one is to class it such, are still very natural, you see).
About it being synthetic or supernatural;
To assume that it is supernatural is silly; there is no way to validate that.
To think it is synthetic is somewhat overestimating human's ability to change human sexuality, as there have been no such sucessful attempts at that.
That it goes against a natural order [of reproduction] it doesn't make it unnatural.


Thanks, but a few more questions. I agree that it does happen in nature. We can see this in people and in animals. However, concerning the last sentence you noted how if something goes against natural order, that it doesn't make it unnatural. But how can that be?

If I went and did something that was against the natural, then wouldn't that automatically make the very act that I partake in unnatural? I know it's really a semantic issue, but clarify if you could.

Now I'm no scientist, and again, I'm fairly new to the topic so guidance would be truly appreciated. But if our genes dictate ones gender on the physical level, then why does it apparently not do so on others? I see many people who are physically one way, yet claim to be the other. Most of the time it seems to be based off of ones own feelings (again, this is only my speculation), so what gives?


I retract that last sentence. It goes against a trend.


So as far as reproduction goes, it's unnatural? I mean, it would have to be as far as reproduction goes...

And could you please address my last paragraph? I mean, if your not sure then that's ok. There's a world of information I can get through other means.


The human mind is a complicated thing that people do not understand. That is the answer. We do not know, and we should not make bold and degrading claims about people who do not describe themselves as heterosexual, based on the fact that we have no clear idea why.


A bold statement to me would be to say that I were a female if I were physically male. Just because I feel like a girl doesn't automatically make me one. I know that may sound offensive but I have a hard time understanding how this logic holds itself up.

Correct me if I'm mistaken but this is what I observe. A man say's on the inside he is a woman because of several factors (as with most things, it's a combination of reasons), but these factors are dependant on ones own feelings (objective), and what is culturally implied (barbie=girl, batman=boy). But if a person uses these to justify what gender they think they are, then isn't it just a claim based off of subjectivity and cultural implication and nothing more? If this is true, then these claims don't hold much weight. They are purely subjective.

Please don't be offended. I am inclined to seek to the bottom of the barrel. What do you think?


It would be a nonsense for you to expect an objective answer concerning one's own feelings, would it not? Impossible, really. You will never feel how these people feel, that they don't relate to gender-roles and gender-specific notions.
If I am to be truthful, I do not relate to male characteristics as implied by society, in any way at all.
When someone says, " I am a girl on the inside", what else do you think that they are insinuating to other than cultural stereotypes and perceptions? How can they relate to anything else?
The short answer is; they can't. There is no objective way of looking at this by it's very nature. As there is no manner for you to tell these people that they are wrong.
Why freakin fight about this?
You all have lives to spent.
If you believe in God or not, he hates us fighting over it.
I believe it's unnatural in the eyes of God, it's even in the bible.
I believe in God with all of my heart, but I know people have other opinions too.
We should all quit it and get along.
We can't judge others....
Why freakin fight about this?
You all have lives to spent.
If you believe in God or not, he hates us fighting over it.
I believe it's unnatural in the eyes of God, it's even in the bible.
I believe in God with all of my heart, but I know people have other opinions too.
We should all quit it and get along.
We can't judge others....
Haha Coffee's avatar

Conservative Dabbler

8,800 Points
  • Forum Dabbler 200
  • Popular Thread 100
  • Citizen 200
vwytche
rolleyes You know what's unatural? Being odsessed with what other people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. Homophobe bible thumpers think about gay sex more than gay people do. confused


But it's not just in the privacy of there own homes.
It's public displays of affection on the street, it's homosexual content in literature and media.
It's them looking to gain equal rights in marriage and civil law.

It's so much more than just what two people do in a room.
The Catfish Blues's avatar

Dangerous Lunatic

5,600 Points
  • Conversationalist 100
  • Forum Sophomore 300
  • Tycoon 200
Haha Coffee
vwytche
rolleyes You know what's unatural? Being odsessed with what other people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. Homophobe bible thumpers think about gay sex more than gay people do. confused


But it's not just in the privacy of there own homes.
It's public displays of affection on the street, it's homosexual content in literature and media.
It's them looking to gain equal rights in marriage and civil law.

It's so much more than just what two people do in a room.
And none of it physically involves you. Yet many think its ok to tell them what to do.
The Catfish Blues
Haha Coffee
vwytche
rolleyes You know what's unatural? Being odsessed with what other people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. Homophobe bible thumpers think about gay sex more than gay people do. confused


But it's not just in the privacy of there own homes.
It's public displays of affection on the street, it's homosexual content in literature and media.
It's them looking to gain equal rights in marriage and civil law.

It's so much more than just what two people do in a room.
And none of it physically involves you. Yet many think its ok to tell them what to do.


There are public decency laws, but I am sure those apply to pretty much everyone except for nursing mothers now. So telling everyone to not have sex in public is okay, but telling people of the same sex to not have sex ever is wrong. Piggybacking upon your post a little Catfish.
vwytche's avatar

Ruthless Survivor

9,400 Points
  • Forum Sophomore 300
  • Signature Look 250
  • Dressed Up 200
Haha Coffee
vwytche
rolleyes You know what's unatural? Being odsessed with what other people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. Homophobe bible thumpers think about gay sex more than gay people do. confused


But it's not just in the privacy of there own homes.
It's public displays of affection on the street, it's homosexual content in literature and media.
It's them looking to gain equal rights in marriage and civil law.

It's so much more than just what two people do in a room.


So what? People need to realize the world does not exsist to please them. Change the channel if you don't like it. Just how far are we supposed to go to try and make sure that no one ever sees anything they don't want to see?

If two gay men are being affectionate in public there's nothing making anyone sit there and stare at them. No one is requiring anyone to look at any gay liturature or media. And two people getting married doesn't affect anyone but the two people involved, so what is everyone squawking about?

This is just the stigma about interfaith and interacial relationships all over again. Why can't the human race grow the zark up?
Haha Coffee's avatar

Conservative Dabbler

8,800 Points
  • Forum Dabbler 200
  • Popular Thread 100
  • Citizen 200
The Catfish Blues
Haha Coffee
vwytche
rolleyes You know what's unatural? Being odsessed with what other people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. Homophobe bible thumpers think about gay sex more than gay people do. confused


But it's not just in the privacy of there own homes.
It's public displays of affection on the street, it's homosexual content in literature and media.
It's them looking to gain equal rights in marriage and civil law.

It's so much more than just what two people do in a room.
And none of it physically involves you. Yet many think its ok to tell them what to do.


Seeing is a physical act.
Haha Coffee's avatar

Conservative Dabbler

8,800 Points
  • Forum Dabbler 200
  • Popular Thread 100
  • Citizen 200
vwytche
Haha Coffee
vwytche
rolleyes You know what's unatural? Being odsessed with what other people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. Homophobe bible thumpers think about gay sex more than gay people do. confused


But it's not just in the privacy of there own homes.
It's public displays of affection on the street, it's homosexual content in literature and media.
It's them looking to gain equal rights in marriage and civil law.

It's so much more than just what two people do in a room.


So what? People need to realize the world does not exsist to please them. Change the channel if you don't like it. Just how far are we supposed to go to try and make sure that no one ever sees anything they don't want to see?

If two gay men are being affectionate in public there's nothing making anyone sit there and stare at them. No one is requiring anyone to look at any gay liturature or media. And two people getting married doesn't affect anyone but the two people involved, so what is everyone squawking about?

This is just the stigma about interfaith and interacial relationships all over again. Why can't the human race grow the zark up?


Social norms
The Catfish Blues's avatar

Dangerous Lunatic

5,600 Points
  • Conversationalist 100
  • Forum Sophomore 300
  • Tycoon 200
Haha Coffee
The Catfish Blues
Haha Coffee
vwytche
rolleyes You know what's unatural? Being odsessed with what other people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. Homophobe bible thumpers think about gay sex more than gay people do. confused


But it's not just in the privacy of there own homes.
It's public displays of affection on the street, it's homosexual content in literature and media.
It's them looking to gain equal rights in marriage and civil law.

It's so much more than just what two people do in a room.
And none of it physically involves you. Yet many think its ok to tell them what to do.


Seeing is a physical act.
you can look away if it bothers you.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get Items
Get Gaia Cash
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games