sexual orientation

[poopnoodle]

I don't like how you worded your thread, I can tell your position from the first sentence; Your gauging the conversation. Your are suppose to propose what the subject is, later post your view, and your reasons for belief.

i didn't ask for criticism on how i presented my questions. there are no specific structural regulations to follow here, and i wasn't looking to hide my stance. you're welcome to express an opposing opinion anytime.

 

[NarutoActor]

I know there is no set structure, but when you want to have an intelligent conversation its a good rule of thumb. My opposing view is already looked down upon by people who have initially read your thread, and feel sympathy towards your opinion. The conversation was un fairly placed in your favor, in it sets the tone scaring away possible arguments. Then from there it just becomes a echo room, and less of a discussion. :/

 

[Rogue planet]

I know there is no set structure, but when you want to have an intelligent conversation its a good rule of dumb. My opposing view is already looked down upon by people who have initially read your thread, and feel sympathy towards your opinion. The conversation was un fairly placed in your favor, in it sets the tone scaring away possible arguments. Then from there it just becomes a echo room, and less of a discussion. :/

Why is it a rule of thumb? Poopnoodle is just another poster like everyone else here, why should she be restricted about posting her opinion? People here are not children that believe whatever is said to them. The topic of sexuality is not something that is new to everyone here. People will already have their own opinion and it is not going to suddenly change just because the creator of a thread about sexuality on a Pokemon forum had a particular opinion. Do you seriously think if poopnoodle made a thread saying how anything other than heterosexuality is bad would be full of people agreeing with that viewpoint? I don't think so. And that's not the case in this situation either.

I mean, you clearly did not read the first post and suddenly agree with everything poopnoodle says just because she is the thread creator. So why do you think everybody else would do that?

I think you're just annoyed because everyone has a different opinion from you in this thread. After reading the thread, you realised nobody would take your side if you tried putting forward your own view, got annoyed by that and tried to find something to complain about instead.

 

[poopnoodle]

I know there is no set structure, but when you want to have an intelligent conversation its a good rule of dumb. My opposing view is already looked down upon by people who have initially read your thread, and feel sympathy towards your opinion. The conversation was un fairly placed in your favor, in it sets the tone scaring away possible arguments. Then from there it just becomes a echo room, and less of a discussion. :/

you're right, the intent of the thread is to express views from all sides, and i'm sorry you feel uncomfortable expressing yourself because of the context of my post. i'll keep that in mind next time around, thanks for kindly pointing it out to me. your views on sexual orientation are welcome, please feel free to proceed with them

 

[NarutoActor]

Why is it a rule of thumb? Poopnoodle is just another poster like everyone else here, why should she be restricted about posting her opinion? People here are not children that believe whatever is said to them. The topic of sexuality is not something that is new to everyone here. People will already have their own opinion and it is not going to suddenly change just because the creator of a thread about sexuality on a Pokemon forum had a particular opinion. Do you seriously think if poopnoodle made a thread saying how anything other than heterosexuality is bad would be full of people agreeing with that viewpoint? I don't think so. And that's not the case in this situation either.

I mean, you clearly did not read the first post and suddenly agree with everything poopnoodle says just because she is the thread creator. So why do you think everybody else would do that?

I think you're just annoyed because everyone has a different opinion from you in this thread. After reading the thread, you realised nobody would take your side if you tried putting forward your own view, got annoyed by that and tried to find something to complain about instead.

You place your opinion after you make a neutral statement. The reason why there are no opposing views is because of that exact reason, I will not degrade myself, and play on your terms.

(P.S thanks, I fixed the word error)

you're right, the intent of the thread is to express views from all sides, and i'm sorry you feel uncomfortable expressing yourself because of the context of my post. i'll keep that in mind next time around, thanks for kindly pointing it out to me. your views on sexual orientation are welcome, please feel free to proceed with them

Thank you, I am glad you understand. I do not wish to offend anyone or hurt anybody's feelings. I am not a homophone, I have to work with gay people, I don't mind it has long has they don't bring it up, or act so bluntly about it. It makes me feel uncomfortable, and I want to share with them that it is not appropriate to be sharing that at work. I also do not express sympathy for people who say they where born gay; for multiply reasons. For one I believe it is not acceptable to be gay, that it is a perversion of Gods original intent, which is a whole other subject. How can you use that argument with out first proving that god is real. I can wright a whole book about this but since I am going to go hang out with my friends later I will try to keep this in a paragraph. I will humor you, and say you are born homosexual; so what? You were born crying non stop, and you where born placing everything in your both, as you grow, so did your intelligence.

 

[Rogue planet]

You place your opinion after you make a neutral statement. The reason why there are no opposing views is because of that exact reason, I will not degrade myself, and play on your terms.

(P.S thanks, I fixed the word error)

People are not so simple and impressionable. You're basically saying everyone in this thread is too stupid to develop their own opinion, so they just have to echo the words of the thread creator. I think most of the people here are smarter than that.

Did you not think that maybe everyone mainly agrees on the same thing in this thread because it's the most rational and respectful viewpoint? You're making a bold claim with no evidence to back it up at all.

 

[Kura]

You place your opinion after you make a neutral statement. The reason why there are no opposing views is because of that exact reason, I will not degrade myself, and play on your terms.

(P.S thanks, I fixed the word error)



Thank you, I am glad you understand. I do not wish to offend anyone or hurt anybody's feelings. I am not a homophone, I have to work with gay people, I don't mind it has long has they don't bring it up, or act so bluntly about it. It makes me feel uncomfortable, and I want to share with them that it is not appropriate to be sharing that at work. I also do not express sympathy for people who say they where born gay; for multiply reasons. For one I believe it is not acceptable to be gay, that it is a perversion of Gods original intent, which is a whole other subject. How can you use that argument with out first proving that god is real. I can wright a whole book about this but since I am going to go hang out with my friends later I will try to keep this in a paragraph. I will humor you, and say you are born homosexual; so what? You were born crying non stop, and you where born placing everything in your both, as you grow, so did your intelligence.

Not entirely true. I stated my opposing views and I didn't get called out for it. I don't think you should get called out for your views, either. They're your own views and no one really has the right to change them.

People are not so simple and impressionable. You're basically saying everyone in this thread is too stupid to develop their own opinion, so they just have to echo the words of the thread creator. I think most of the people here are smarter than that.

Did you not think that maybe everyone mainly agrees on the same thing in this thread because it's the most rational and respectful viewpoint? You're making a bold claim with no evidence to back it up at all.

Back the bus up. If you're saying he shouldn't make such a bold claim, then you shouldn't make a similar claim by assuming that he's "Basically saying everyone in this thread is too stupid to develop their own opinion." :/ Because you don't have any real evidence to back that up, either. You are just contextualizing what he is saying by your own terms. Otherwise, if it was real evidence, I would've got that same vibe, but I don't.

 

[NarutoActor]

People are not so simple and impressionable. You're basically saying everyone in this thread is too stupid to develop their own opinion, so they just have to echo the words of the thread creator. I think most of the people here are smarter than that.

Did you not think that maybe everyone mainly agrees on the same thing in this thread because it's the most rational and respectful viewpoint? You're making a bold claim with no evidence to back it up at all.

Not true, when you read something the first thing you do is form your opinion based on your situation. People are generally nice, and want to have a conversation with out hurting anybody. But when a conversation is worded in such a way that the opposing opinion is demonized, then that opinion will never be expressed. Also the creator of the thread apologized, end of story.

 

[Cherrim]

This is a discussion on sexual orientation, not a discussion on "how to present or continue discussions".

It's fine to have opposing views--if you read through the thread, you can see that several people have had opposing views and have received no personal attacks over it. If you post and someone does harass you about it, report them.

Now back on topic, guys.

 

[Alice]

This is a discussion on sexual orientation, not a discussion on "how to present or continue discussions".

It's fine to have opposing views--if you read through the thread, you can see that several people have had opposing views and have received no personal attacks over it. If you post and someone does harass you about it, report them.

Now back on topic, guys.

Back on topic? Ok...

Narutoactor's thread got locked as I was typing this, but it was in response to someone wanting proof that people aren't born gay. I'm just sharing my opinion on the issue.

Do you have any solid scientific evidence to prove this?

I don't personally believe you are born with ANY sexual preference. Granted your body is designed for a specific use, but that may or may not come into play. Really, all we are is the culmination of all of our experiences in life. A gay person's experiences lead him or her to be Gay. It wasn't a decision, and they weren't born that way.

Example: I've been exposed to far more yaoi than I would like lately, due to the anime that I'm watching, and all of the girls on deviantart drawing yuri one day and then after I deviantwatch them, they seem to draw nothing but yaoi. I'll admit, just because I'm exposed to it so much, I have a little nagging feeling inside that wants to try it. Now, I'm straight, and I'm going to stay straight, if I have anything to say about it, but this is the perfect example of how our experiences shape who we are.

 

[professor plum]

I don't personally believe you are born with ANY sexual preference. Granted your body is designed for a specific use, but that may or may not come into play. Really, all we are is the culmination of all of our experiences in life. A gay person's experiences lead him or her to be Gay. It wasn't a decision, and they weren't born that way.

Example: I've been exposed to far more yaoi than I would like lately, due to the anime that I'm watching, and all of the girls on deviantart drawing yuri one day and then after I deviantwatch them, they seem to draw nothing but yaoi. I'll admit, just because I'm exposed to it so much, I have a little nagging feeling inside that wants to try it. Now, I'm straight, and I'm going to stay straight, if I have anything to say about it, but this is the perfect example of how our experiences shape who we are.

Yes, but what about when children receive no exposure to homosexuality, yet it shows itself naturally.
Personal example, when I was in kindergarten (at a private school, nonetheless), while playing house, I would have a husband instead of a wife. I didn't see anything wrong with it at the time, it just seemed natural to me. I was told, later, that it wasn't right, but I never understood why until I was older.

I mean, I'm just saying: there are cases in which people have no exposure to homosexuality wind up homosexuals.
And...well, feeling inclined to try something doesn't mean you're gay or bisexual.
It just means you're curious.

0 Exclusively heterosexual
1 Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual
2 Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3 Equally heterosexual and homosexual; bisexual.
4 Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5 Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual
6 Exclusively homosexual
X Asexual, Non-Sexual

It would probably grant you like a 0.5 on the Kinsey Scale :P

Anyway, throughout my childhood, I noticed other boys pursuing girls. And, I thought to myself, "Well, why am I not doing that? Geez, keep up with the times, loser!" So, I tried to like girls. I wound up trying to date girls, but I simply found myself not attracted to them beyond the "oh, hey, they're pretty." which I associate with admiration.

Boys, on the other hand, were on my mind. I was definitely attracted to them. Haha.

Regarding gay pride, I find no problem with it. Pride parades are fine, and as long as we remain discriminated against, there's nothing wrong with it.

I think the problem is, actually, that people aren't accepting of homosexuality; ergo, should they just accept it - not make a big deal about it - then basically wouldn't the whole problem go away? I mean, the reason we protest and whatnot is because we're not treated equally, and we want people to know it's NOT wrong to be gay. Once this is accomplished, and homosexuality is just..there and not even an issue to be discussed, then everything will be good ^-^;

However, as long as there is ignorance in the world, people will still say, "Oh my gosh, you're gay??!?! wtf!!!" which often, in turn, leads to "Yeah, I'm gay. I'm in your face, get over it!"..

 

[FreakyLocz14]

I have a hard time believing gay people are born that way. Someone presented the argument that gay men have more feminine brains than straight men, and that is what makes them gay. I would disagree, because the large majority of the gay men I know are either as if not more masculine than most of the straight men I know. I still don't think being gay is a bad thing, born that way or not.

Also, if people are born with their sexual orientation, why aren't young children sexually interested in the opposite (or same) sex? In fact, many children go through the "opposite-sex has cooties" phase. I believe that sexuality is developed as children go through puberty.

 

[Amai]

It is backed up greatly by many studies that there are certain characteristics that are more common in people with a certain sexuality, and recently a study has been done that when gay parents have kids, there is a higher chance that the child will be gay as well.

http://nymag.com/news/features/33520/

The other link has some..innappropriate ads for a Pokemon forum, so.. I will put the article in a spoiler:

Spoiler:

If sexuality is determined in the womb by genetics, is it safe to say gay parents are more likely to drown their unborn children in amniotic fluid over-saturated with gayness? In an analysis of 26 studies focusing on the children of gay parents, a new research paper from Kansas State University's Walter Schumm finds "evidence [... that] suggests intergenerational transfer of sexual orientation can occur at statistically significant and substantial rates, especially for female parents or female children." Isn't that just what leading bigot Paul Cameron at the nauseously conservative Family Research Institute found?

Schumm was provoked to study the question closely after a researcher at the conservative Family Research Institute was vilified after publishing a study concluding that "parents' sexual inclinations influence their children's." That study concluded that about 30 percent of the children of gay parents identified themselves as homosexual.
That is near identical to the 28 percent figure that Schumm arrived at in his meta-analysis of the 26 previously published studies. The 28 percent figure only applied to children who were over the age of 17; the figure dropped to 20 percent when children younger than 17 were included in the data.
​

Cameron's study found,

Of 77 adult children of homosexual parents who volunteered for three different investigations, at least 23 (30%) were currently homosexual: twelve (55%) of 22 daughters and three (21%) of fourteen sons of lesbians; five (29%) of seventeen daughters and three (17%) of eighteen sons of gays; none of six sons with both a gay and a lesbian parent. At least 25 (32%) were currently heterosexual. Of the ten with transsexual parents, one of nine daughters was currently lesbian, one was currently heterosexual, and one was transsexual. The son's sexual preference was not reported. These findings suggest that parents' sexual inclinations influence their children's.
​

You might recognize Schumm's name: He testified during the 2008 Florida gay adoption trial that is finally — finally — on its last legs. Box Turtle Bulletin noted at the time,

Schumm is considerably more circumspect in how he uses Cameron's research, but he did publish a 2000 article in Psychological Reports, Paul Cameron's favorite publication outlet, defending Cameron's research methods against Dr. Gregory Herek's criticisms. Schumm is also listed as a member of Cameron's "Editorial and Scientific Review Board" for the EJSSB.
In the trial, Schumm used data from his recent Psychological Reports article to claim that about 19 percent of children raised by gay parents are likely to become gay, compared with 4 percent of children with straight parents. Testifying for Frank Gill, the gay foster father, Susan D. Cochran, a professor of epidemiology and statistics at UCLA, accused Schumm of cooking his data.
​

(AOL News claims "Schumm's testimony actually ended up aiding the gay parents in the trial," having told the court, "Gay parents can be good foster parents" and "The decision to permit homosexuals to adopt is best made by the judiciary on a case by case basis.")
Whether you think Schumm's findings are damaging is one thing. Whether you think he's motivated by animus is another. Says Schumm: "I'm trying to prove that it's not 100 percent genetic." And isn't that quite the bias going into this. That, and his research is suspect, notes AOL:

His study is a meta-analysis of existing work. First, Schumm extrapolated data from 10 books on gay parenting; Cameron, for what it's worth, had only looked at three, and offered no statistical analysis in his paper. Schumm skewed his data so that only self-identified gay and lesbian children would be labeled as such.
This is important because sometimes Schumm would come across a passage of children of gay parents who said they were "adamant about not declaring their sexual orientation at all." These people would be labeled straight, even though the passage's implication was that they were gay.
[...] In Schumm's study, he quotes from the extant literature the stories of young women, describing how being gay was never frowned upon in their household, and so that "option" was available to them. That said, Schumm also finds evidence of gay mothers pushing their daughters, upset over a relationship with a man, to "try out women." But couldn't gay men also tell their sons this? Yes, but Schumm tells AOL News that most gay men have at some point been with a woman, so they understand why their sons might date them. Whereas the literature shows some lesbians "have a hatred of men that's intense," Schumm says.
​

There's so much "science" in here, the mind boggles!
​

 

[professor plum]

I have a hard time believing gay people are born that way. Someone presented the argument that gay men have more feminine brains than straight men, and that is what makes them gay. I would disagree, because the large majority of the gay men I know are either as if not more masculine than most of the straight men I know. I still don't think being gay is a bad thing, born that way or not.

Also, if people are born with their sexual orientation, why aren't young children sexually interested in the opposite (or same) sex? In fact, many children go through the "opposite-sex has cooties" phase. I believe that sexuality is developed as children go through puberty.

Because people don't go through sexual awakenings until they've hit puberty, no? I mean, people can be born with their sexual orientation, and it's just a matter of when they mature to feel an attraction beyond being friends. :p

@Studies Well, studies are good for a general population, but they should never be accepted as absolute fact because there is, in general, an exception to most of those studies. One of my friends has gay parents [believe it or not, a gay male and female (they were best friends) who wanted to have a family], and she's straight as can be :p

 

[FreakyLocz14]

Because people don't go through sexual awakenings until they've hit puberty, no? I mean, people can be born with their sexual orientation, and it's just a matter of when they mature to feel an attraction beyond being friends. :p

I'm still open to possibility that people are born with their sexual orientation. My psychology professor presented the argument I previously mentioned, and I happen to have a good number of gay friends, almost all of them are so "straight-acting" that no one would question their sexuality unless they saw them in bed with their partners. If gay men's brains are more feminine, I really can't see the difference in behavior.

And I also know that many people, even straight people, experiment with the same-sex before coming to the conclusion on what their sexual orientation is. Perhaps they try the same-sex out and end up developing a liking to it.

Also, one study doesn't prove anything. Nothing is ever proven in science. There would have to be so many similar studies that it becomes generally accepted as scientific fact to be considered "proven".

 

[Rich Boy Rob]

My siding on the sexuality at birth is that everyone is bisexual, but develop their sexuality as they mature. Of course this argument also works if you say that everyone is born asexual.

 

[Alice]

^ I'd say it's more likely asexual, if it's one of the two.

 

[Timbjerr]

I've always believed it was something like 50/50 nature vs. nurture. We're definitely all born asexual and as we develop in puberty, we form associations between what gender we happen to be around at the moment and what degree of happiness our raging hormones make us feel. Of course, there are people with a higher genetic predisposition for homosexuality than others and vice-versa.

There are even people like me that, perhaps due to hormone deficiencies or certain social issues during those ever-important adolescent years, never really develop any sexuality and remain asexual for all intents and purposes throughout their life. :/

 

[Esper]

Once this is accomplished, and homosexuality is just..there and not even an issue to be discussed, then everything will be good ^-^;

Sometimes I doubt we'll ever reach this point. I mean, I know there are people who don't even think in these terms because it's not an issue for them and they don't see a point in making an issue out of it, but it feels like even in the more accepting places there's a growing tendency to label and categorize everyone. Like, there are gay-specific bookstores and bars and cruises and probably anything you can think of. That's all good in that it gives people an atmosphere where they don't have to worry about bigots, but I worry that it's leading toward people being more insulated from anything that is different. I'd rather that gay and straight and queer and intersexed and everyone could enjoy and appreciate each others' presence.

 

[Spinor]

Naturally, and normally, it is Heterosexuality that is dominant. Doesn't take High school biology to learn that life is basically Exist, Reproduce, Die. That is the normal way of biology. We are all supposed to be fated to have children and nurture ourselves as animal species and die after we help our offspring grow.

Homosexuality is therefore a disruption to this natural cycle. Of course, there are many aspects of humanity that disrupt many other natural cycles. Civilization replaced our Primitive instincts. Fight for Survival became Fight for Happiness and Comfort. Competition against other species became Nuclear Weapons armed Soviet Russia against stick and stones Madagascar.

The difference with homosexuality, I believe, is that it may be too unnatural because all those other cycles were disrupted gradually. While homosexuality has of course existed for a long time it's only been technically "recently" since we have so much freedom of speech and civilization that it has spurted. Just like the racial discrimination that spurted when the Europeans found the Africans. Black skin = weirdos was in their mind. But today, that has a more significant decrease. We still have cultural pride but it's not like in the 1700's when you were in command of a black person or the 1970's when you had the urge to shoot every black person you saw. Children and Grandchildren will be exposed to more racial diversity and look back at ancestors and ask what was going through our minds.

Homosexuality is for now just like the Europeans with the Africans, strange and unacceptable to most. Because of civilization all people have really been able to do is promote their pride or promote their hate and discrimination. Of course there's the times violence may erupt. Not only is just the concept of homosexuality strange, but it's also unnatural, in the end.

As humanity, this will eventually wear out. Homosexuality will blend in and will become more accepted someday. But for today, all Heterosexuals as of the others is to not influence what we believe is correct. Of course, there is in reality no "correct" way of anything. It's just what we believe. It's just a mask for a sort of seconds religion. And no Christian would want their children influenced into Buddhism nor otherwise.

But now the question is why homosexuality? People debate it may be in thought since birth, a brain or genetic defect, or whatever you may call it. The fact that homosexuality occurs in nature supports such things. People also debate that homosexuality is a choice. An effect of wanting to be different or because of a way of being raised or as a cause of a different way of thinking.

Why can't you people think that maybe both are possible? We have birth homosexuals and we have choice homosexuals. Maybe the difference may not be obvious, but it's still the same things.

Of course, there's also the why not. As has been said, it is clearly rare in nature. And the thought of intercourse with the same gender to someone who grew for a long time that it should only be a man and a woman will of course be outright revolting. And it's going to apply to people who get the concept of homosexuality when they're 9 or when they're 15 or maybe much later.

Now, time for me to clear up a line. There's the intercourse part of homosexuality and there's the "true love" part of homosexuality.

If it comes right down to emotion and the confidence that it's love, then I, as a full pledge heterosexual, do not see why that is wrong. If you believe you have a feeling of love between someone your same gender, that may as well be alright because that has more to do with choice and human emotion rather than natural aspects.

The intercourse part, being homosexual just for that. I'm not gonna lie, that's the exact and only reason why the most reasonable of people reject homosexuality.

But in the end, it's convenient to stop and think homosexuality for the emotion is not exactly the worst possible thing on earth. Love is the business between two people, and that can't be changed.


Basically, I want to rephrase, love each other as you will and disregard gender if you wish to have it disregarded. But it's always the concept of such intercourse being passed on that's worrisome. If there could be a way for homosexuality to be represented as another kind of love instead of an unnatural intercourse like it's in 99% of people's minds, then my children might live for the day that humanity is a bit more united.