AIDS infected dick sucking woman wannabe.

[Robert Jan]

"I certainly don't think that heterosexuality is the norm and homosexuality is the deviation."

Well... it does seem logical that it is imo. Sex, from a purely biologic and ethologic stance is there for reproduction IMO...

"In any case, until I was 24 I ruled out any option of sex with men but this didn't drive me into sexual liasons with women"

how can you not have sex by choice, until your 24? `was your test level out of whack or something....

 

[HansNZ]

"I certainly don't think that heterosexuality is the norm and homosexuality is the deviation."

Well... it does seem logical that it is imo. Sex, from a purely biologic and ethologic stance is there for reproduction IMO...

No, society has decided that heterosexuality is normal and that homosexuality is deviant, not nature.

Very little sex, in nature or in humans, is for the purpose of reproduction.

"In any case, until I was 24 I ruled out any option of sex with men but this didn't drive me into sexual liasons with women"

how can you not have sex by choice, until your 24? `was your test level out of whack or something....

Nope, I was just a victim of society's prejudice towards homosexuals. So I repressed myself. I was a marathon masturbator though.

 

[nevertoobig]

Well this wa sthe theory throughout the nineteenth century and through most of the twentieth century. Whether it is genetic or not I don't know. If it isn't then neither is heterosexuality. In any case it certainly isn't a choice.

The environmental argument is challenged by the fact that there aren't sufficient consistencies in the childhood environments of gay men to draw a viable conclusion about this.

In any case the social environmental messages are very hostile towards homosexuality, so I don't know why it would be so common.

I have my own theory. If you accept that sexuality is environmental then I think that completely free of social conditioning, people are naturally bisexual. There would probably always be a hard core or people who are gay and people who are straight, probably in the same proportion. The current distortion in favour of the heterosexual direction is a product of societal conditioning.

But it is just a theory. I certainly don't think that heterosexuality is the norm and homosexuality is the deviation.

I think that you're probably correct in saying that without social conditioning, people are naturally bisexual. But i think that since the social conditioning starts very early on in life, this is when a persons sexuality is determined.

I also think though that people are born with a natural instinct to reproduce and that the reason for sex is to reproduce. Therefore making homosexuality less common and a deviation from the normal.

These are just my opinions though.

 

[nevertoobig]

As for the "unnatural" arguments, none of them stack up. The fact is that the animal kingdom is rife with homosexual behaviour, blissfully devoid of human society's ideas of absolutes in this regard.

So, you're saying that just because in the animal kingdom there is homosexual behaviour, then that proves that homosexuality is completely natural?

Can't animals, just like humans undergo psychological changes?

 

[Walter E Kurtz]

"Gays earn less than their straight counterparts" is a fallacy that I have not heard before. Its an interesting propaganda piece, though.

Walter E Kurtz

 

[HansNZ]

"Gays earn less than their straight counterparts" is a fallacy that I have not heard before. Its an interesting propaganda piece, though.

Walter E Kurtz

How do you know it is a fallacy?

I am not informed about that particular issue, but what I do know is that gays often get discriminated against in employment in a number of ways.

 

[HansNZ]

I think that you're probably correct in saying that without social conditioning, people are naturally bisexual. But i think that since the social conditioning starts very early on in life, this is when a persons sexuality is determined.

This is indeed an area where theory reigns and about which we know little for certain. But if it is environmental then the number of causes must vary greatly and be numerous. If homosexuality is "caused" in a particular way then so is heterosexuality.

I also think though that people are born with a natural instinct to reproduce and that the reason for sex is to reproduce. Therefore making homosexuality less common and a deviation from the normal.

These are just my opinions though.

I too think there is an instinct to reproduce, but this is not the purpose of most sexual activity. Sexual activity serves many functions. Even the Catholic church of all institutions recognises that reproduction isn't the only function of sex and that its function as an expression of love for a partner is also just as important.

If we keep going with the bisexuality as the norm and deviations from bisexuality as environmental theory, then there is more I can add to that. In such a situation homosexual tendencies would be strongest before and after prime reproductive periods with heterosexual urges becoming stronger during prime reproductive periods.

I have actually witnessed this process among some peers. I know lesbians who have often become quite "clucky". They go through a period where the experiment with men a little and end up getting pregnant and having a kid. After this their heterosexual urges seems to receed and women are the only people that interest them sexually again. These women have often told me that they were going through a "phase" and in hindsight they don't know why they developed a passing curiousity in men, lol.

Having said this, I do believe there would always be a "hard core" of heterosexuals and homosexuals at each end of the spectrum with no real interest in the same/opposite sex. But the vast majority would fall in between.

 

[HansNZ]

So, you're saying that just because in the animal kingdom there is homosexual behaviour, then that proves that homosexuality is completely natural?

Can't animals, just like humans undergo psychological changes?

Well can you prove that these behaviours aren't normal and are the consequnce of psychological deviations?

Whole species like manatees live the homosexual lifestyle. Their sexual contact through most of the year is with their own sex and only during mating time do the males have intercourse with female manatees. This isn't a deviation from normal behaviour, this IS the normal behaviour of manatees.

Manatees are vegetarians though, so this is evidence that they have probably been corrupted by tree hugging, tofu eating, greenie democrats, lol.

 

[Puc]

I too think there is an instinct to reproduce, but this is not the purpose of most sexual activity. Sexual activity serves many functions. Even the Catholic church of all institutions recognises that reproduction isn't the only function of sex and that its function as an expression of love for a partner is also just as important.

referencing the catholic church in your argument might not be the finest idea.

Hans... i support most of your arguments, but it seems like you are trying to prove that homosexuality is 'normal'... I gotta disagree... if you said it is abnormal but not morally wrong, i would agree wholeheartedly....

 

[HansNZ]

referencing the catholic church in your argument might not be the finest idea.

Hans... i support most of your arguments, but it seems like you are trying to prove that homosexuality is 'normal'... I gotta disagree... if you said it is abnormal but not morally wrong, i would agree wholeheartedly....

hehe, I used the catholic church as an example because it is so conservative.

Homosexuality is normal. That only seems like a questionable statement to most people because society's messages to the contrary have - and continue to be - so strong.

Society defines what normality is. It is, after all, a relative term. So in this sense you are right. It is not normal because society has decided it isn't.

In the nineteenth century the idea than non-white races could be intellectually and morally equal to the white race was considered quite absurd, except among a tiny minority of liberal intellectuals. To claim otherwise would have been seen as lacking in obvious common sense.