11th June 2003, 12:54 PM
ABF, while I usually side with you on this issue, I think it's getting a bit silly, but I know what you mean. I think what he's trying to say is: (assuming the male perspective)
Just as having sex with a woman does not make you irrevocably straight, having sex with a man does not make you irrevocably gay.
There are several instances of men who sleep around with girls all throughout high school and end up finding that they have more urges directed toward males. This person is gay. Because of the slant of society, a person that sleeps with guys for a while and finds that he is more attracted to females is also considered gay.
Is it a double standard? Absolutely. The second person should be considered straight. But is that ever going to happen? No.
Weltall, I think it's premature to end this. You still haven't adressed my main points. In fact, you've continuously ignored them. You try to simplify the issue into some 2-sided game and declare a "winner." Are you the most objective judge, and does this really have only two sides? I think the answer is "no." on both counts. The definition of gay is not the issue, as you point out. So let's get back to the issue.
When we left off...
Weltall states that everyone has varying levels of homosexual and heterosexual urges.
To which I pointed out that it seems we are going toward some kind of population distribution curve. If so, is it so hard to believe that at the extremes of this curve are people that have a majority of homosexual urges?
In addition, I asked why it is better or more natural to follow one type of urge while repressing the other. Weltall responded, "Because acting on them is acting against your nature. Homosexual urges are a sign of sexual immaturity." To which I said, "huh?" Due to Weltall's previous posts, I assume that by nature he means that it is natural to have sex to make babies. If the "naturalness" or "goodness" of sex is judged upon its ability to create children, what makes homosexual sex any different from, say, heterosexual sex with contraception?
Finally, I wish to question the black and whiteness of choice. Aren't there different levels of choice in life? For example:
(guesstimates, with each varying for different people)
0 choice-genetics. You're African American or you're not. You have blue eyes or you don't. There's no choice.
20% choice-throwing up. Your body is pretty sure when it wants to throw up, but there is a small amount of psychological control.
30% (maybe less) chemical dependencies- drugs actually mess with the chemicals and mechanics in your brain. When you're missing the chemical, you get incredibly sick and crave the chemical. However, people have been able to get off drugs (usually not without help) so I put it in the 30% range.
40% breathing- your body controls breathing automatically unless you happen to think about it. In this case, you can affect your breathing, and even try to stop breathing altogether. But try as you may, you cannot suffocate yourself simply by thinking hard. You'd pass out and your body would regain 100% control of breathing.
50% choice- eating-Yes, your body tells you that you should eat, but you will survive much after your stomach begins to gurgle. As you go from hunger to starvation, this number drops significantly.
80%(maybe higher) choice- starting to use a drug. You are psychologically attracted to do things with your friends, but there is no biologically compelling factor. This number goes down if you're drunk/high.
90% choice- Ice cream flavor. It's basically choice, but sometimes you're craving your favorite flavor. What makes one flavor better than the other? Taste buds/subconscious memory. That's the ten percent that's out of your hands.
99% choice- Adult Political belief. I say "Adult" because children's opinions are highly influenced by their parents. By the time someone is an adult, they've thought quite a bit about politics. Yet upbringing is out of your hands, which accounts for the .1%
So where does sexual attraction fit on this scale? Personally, I'd put it around 10% (maybe less). It's all pretty much subconscious/hormonal. You don't really choose when you get an erection.
Sexual action, on the other hand, I'd put up around 85%. While people can rarely effect what arouses them, they can control what they do about it. But as many teenagers can attest to, there are many times when you just HAVE to get off. This of course varies person-to-person, gets lower if you're drunk/high, and gets higher as you age.
Just as having sex with a woman does not make you irrevocably straight, having sex with a man does not make you irrevocably gay.
There are several instances of men who sleep around with girls all throughout high school and end up finding that they have more urges directed toward males. This person is gay. Because of the slant of society, a person that sleeps with guys for a while and finds that he is more attracted to females is also considered gay.
Is it a double standard? Absolutely. The second person should be considered straight. But is that ever going to happen? No.
Weltall, I think it's premature to end this. You still haven't adressed my main points. In fact, you've continuously ignored them. You try to simplify the issue into some 2-sided game and declare a "winner." Are you the most objective judge, and does this really have only two sides? I think the answer is "no." on both counts. The definition of gay is not the issue, as you point out. So let's get back to the issue.
When we left off...
Weltall states that everyone has varying levels of homosexual and heterosexual urges.
To which I pointed out that it seems we are going toward some kind of population distribution curve. If so, is it so hard to believe that at the extremes of this curve are people that have a majority of homosexual urges?
In addition, I asked why it is better or more natural to follow one type of urge while repressing the other. Weltall responded, "Because acting on them is acting against your nature. Homosexual urges are a sign of sexual immaturity." To which I said, "huh?" Due to Weltall's previous posts, I assume that by nature he means that it is natural to have sex to make babies. If the "naturalness" or "goodness" of sex is judged upon its ability to create children, what makes homosexual sex any different from, say, heterosexual sex with contraception?
Finally, I wish to question the black and whiteness of choice. Aren't there different levels of choice in life? For example:
(guesstimates, with each varying for different people)
0 choice-genetics. You're African American or you're not. You have blue eyes or you don't. There's no choice.
20% choice-throwing up. Your body is pretty sure when it wants to throw up, but there is a small amount of psychological control.
30% (maybe less) chemical dependencies- drugs actually mess with the chemicals and mechanics in your brain. When you're missing the chemical, you get incredibly sick and crave the chemical. However, people have been able to get off drugs (usually not without help) so I put it in the 30% range.
40% breathing- your body controls breathing automatically unless you happen to think about it. In this case, you can affect your breathing, and even try to stop breathing altogether. But try as you may, you cannot suffocate yourself simply by thinking hard. You'd pass out and your body would regain 100% control of breathing.
50% choice- eating-Yes, your body tells you that you should eat, but you will survive much after your stomach begins to gurgle. As you go from hunger to starvation, this number drops significantly.
80%(maybe higher) choice- starting to use a drug. You are psychologically attracted to do things with your friends, but there is no biologically compelling factor. This number goes down if you're drunk/high.
90% choice- Ice cream flavor. It's basically choice, but sometimes you're craving your favorite flavor. What makes one flavor better than the other? Taste buds/subconscious memory. That's the ten percent that's out of your hands.
99% choice- Adult Political belief. I say "Adult" because children's opinions are highly influenced by their parents. By the time someone is an adult, they've thought quite a bit about politics. Yet upbringing is out of your hands, which accounts for the .1%
So where does sexual attraction fit on this scale? Personally, I'd put it around 10% (maybe less). It's all pretty much subconscious/hormonal. You don't really choose when you get an erection.
Sexual action, on the other hand, I'd put up around 85%. While people can rarely effect what arouses them, they can control what they do about it. But as many teenagers can attest to, there are many times when you just HAVE to get off. This of course varies person-to-person, gets lower if you're drunk/high, and gets higher as you age.