The Real Problem With Homosexuality

[Idolfan]

No one move this to R/s! This is not about religion at all! Some of you might have seen me sticking up for homosexuality in the past. What I want to get very clear from the start is that this is not a point against all types of homosexual behaviour, and it certainly does not pertain to what should be legal and illegal. Instead it is a warning, rather like you tell people to wear condomns without actually making it illegal for them not to (but I bloody would ). Studies such as this: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0617151845.htm have been used in defense of the argument that homosexuality is predetermined. While this solves some issues, I believe it causes others. I have had the notion for a long time that there is something fundamental in human nature about uniting masculine and feminine aspects in relationships. I don't know for certain whether this is instinctive, but it's obviously culturally and in most cases socially prefferable for one partner to adopt a masculine role, and another a feminine role. I hear too many people saying, "Look, some men just love other men, some women just love other women, that's it", as if it's that simple. It's obviously not! If most homosexuals have the brain structure of the opposite sex, then who are they going to find when they seek another homosexual partner? In most cases, someone who has the same brain structure. In this case we no longer have, for example, two gay men, we have to gay man lesbians. Why is this a problem? It is not. As long as you don't want a masculine/feminine relationship*. However, most people DO. And for good reason. Obviously, there are people out there who are exceptions to the rule (I consider myself to be one), and that's okay. However, homosexuals ought to have the foresight that it will probably be very hard to find a suitable partner. *(having the physical body of the opposite psychological sex makes no immediate difference to the emotions of a relationship, so this doesn't count) I don't know much about gay 'culture', but I have heard and can easily imagine that many gay men, who don't exactly have their feet on the ground, will squander a lot of their time in fleeting relationships or simply shagging a lot because they are unable to handle the emotional implications. If this is how someone prefers to live, this is not a problem, however the people in question do so out of conformity or desperation, because they are confused. I think there should be big changes made in public education about homosexuality. Political correctness has gone so far through the roof that many people dismiss this obvious problem and make it out as if any man/man or woman/woman relationship can be just as fulfilling as any man/woman relationship. We don't live in a unisexual utopia; this is a lie. Since both statistically (see link) and by general knowledge, we know that effeminite gay people tend to far outweigh their counterparts, this in theory renders the chances of successful gay relationships to be far less than straight ones. If this is not the case, and gay relationships are just as successful, then the only other option is that it should be possible for anyone to love anyone romantically regardless of whether they have a masculine or feminine psychology. A lot of straight people aren't going to like this. However, I would be extremely skeptical of any study done in this field because it's quite possible that the vast majority of gay couples involve the minority group. Which leaves a lot of very unhappy, single gay people. I haven't looked this up yet, but if I get any replies I will provide more info when I can. (if you are furious about my claims, please keep your responses passionately angry, so I know how it feels)

[Kuhnada29]

Isn't this like the 2nd or 3rd thread on the same subject? Dude if you are gay then you are just gay. There's no "scientific experiment" to test and see if it's "predetermined"..wtf Seriously. There's no PROBLEM with homosexuality...it's just a preference. It's what YOU LIKE. NO "certain" brain structure makes you any different. From any other human. Brain structure doesn't determine what you like...and if it does..you can consciously "change what you like". I talked about ways to do this with subliminal messaging/imaging and NLP, but you got mad. Obviously that is too "mystical" for people, so i keep stuff like that in BD or religion/spirituality.

[Redeyedwolfking]

Brain structure certainly plays a role in sexual orientation, and from what information I have happened upon, it would seem as if the same qualities that make someone homosexual can make someone resemble the opposite sex psychologically. I'm sure they do to an extent. However, The gay men I have met don't behave much like women relationship wise. I honestly think gay culture makes men appear more effeminate than they are. In the same respect that straight men try to act tough, I think that openly gay men will affiliate themselves with feminine interests and mannerisms. anyway, to respond to the main point of your thread: It is not my belief that a happy relationship depends heavily on the union of male and female characteristics. Too much importance is given to this aspect of relationships. It is mostly an excuse to deny gay people rights. It's true that women prefer manly men and men prefer womanly women for the most part, but gay men are looking for men, and I think that is what they will find, maybe with a dash of woman, but still plenty man enough. The same idea goes for lesbians too.

[Idolfan]

Isn't this like the 2nd or 3rd thread on the same subject? Dude if you are gay then you are just gay. There's no "scientific experiment" to test and see if it's "predetermined"..wtf Seriously. OMG... I'm... GAY??????????????? I suppose I should be the LAST person to come up with this stuff! And anyway, WTF? That's the most retarded set of scentences I've seen in a good while. "If you are gay you are just gay". And then you go on to say that it's not predetermined? WhAt Do YoU mEaN? I also want to remind you that I haven't started ANY threads on homosexuality other than ONE in the 'Help!' section. So stop pulling stuff out of your arse because it is bullshit. If you want to prove a point find me one (within a few months of posting). And that does NOT include references to the subject, the thread must be ABOUT homosexuality. Obviously that is too "mystical" for people, so i keep stuff like that in BD or religion/spirituality. Your opinion that we can 'change what we like' will also not go down well with anyone. Least of all the scientists. Can you do me a favour? Go out on the street and start sinking your teeth into molten tarmac and see if that suits your appetite. If you don't like it then STFU your point is useless. Besides, if we CAN change our sexuality, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. It's fuck all to do with the subject, unless you're suggesting it as a cure for the problem. But on that point, I'd love to see you 'subliminal message' a completely different brain structure away. It's obvious that a lot of homosexuals have different brain structures because they act like the opposite sex. If it's 'just a preference' then why does it just happen to be all to do with your personality as well? There's no PROBLEM with homosexuality...it's just a preference. And I have a preference to floor you. Is that not a problem? A preference does not equal flawlessness. You must analyse how the preference would play out on a social level and then try to see if there will be a problem. That's what I'm doing.

[Idolfan]

It is not my belief that a happy relationship depends heavily on the union of male and female characteristics. Too much importance is given to this aspect of relationships. Admittedly I picked most of these ideas up from spiritual theories, but I simply assume that they are innately natural because it seems so obvious that masculinity and femininity need to co-exist to survive. It has been the same way since the dawn of man. It is like a balancing force. Unless you have special people with specific interests, I would have thought it works the same way in relationships. But if I was wrong and it is simply an overexaggerated false dichotomy enforced by religion, then that is... well, simply mind blowing. Then we would be suggesting that really, the only thing enforcing the gender gap is physical attraction. And then, once Hard Wired has got his subliminalismus going we'll all be in love with each other. This would... perhaps be a better world. As long as you can bitch slap envy into submission rather like men do with women in Islam. And, if you ask me that's the only real dismissal of the masculine/feminine balance in history. Update: I found an interesting statistic that approximately 30-67% of gay men have no quarrel with polyamory. Or maybe it was 30% involved, 67% open to it or something like that. This probably comes from the subculture because I thought that a natural effeminite mind would be just as hostile to the idea of polyamory as the female mind, and in general men have a better time embracing it. But, I'm not going to complain. If the proportions I mentioned in my starting post are correct; this is one potential way of providing lasting emotional stability to a lot of gay people, if they know they can handle it.

[Marvo]

...In this case we no longer have, for example, two gay men, we have to gay man lesbians. I stopped reading here.

[Jimmehboi]

Everyone seems to have points here, it's not like everyone can chime in with a million different opinions and you can all believe that you are correct, you are neive if you think like this. The human mind is complicated, we can look at every animal in the world and we are so determined to believe that WE are the most intelligent out of them all. So when religion used to say "All animals are heterosexual, therefore, God intends for us to have female mates if we are male, and vice versa;" THEN religion refers to animals as inferior to the human race and that we are "special". Although this isn't a clear contrast, you can still see the endless questions that could arise in order to "widen the plot-holes". So when someone says "Listen, some men like men, some women like women, that's it." I suppose they are correct, in a nutshell. I believe that nature isn't designed to a perfect scheme which can never be de-railed, because it can- wasps mate with orchid petals, humans can mate with the same sex. I do not believe that it is by any means efficient, because it isn't if everyone was homosexual then the human race could be wiped out. But the intelligence of humans and some other animals can cause them to ignore the instincts of their make-up. There's nothing to say that it's right or wrong, overall, morally- there's nothing wrong with it, in terms of reproduction- it IS wrong. You cant just sum everything up into one, not in our society anyway, humans have gone so far from the point that homosexuality is the least of our worries.

[Alric]

Your opinion that we can 'change what we like' will also not go down well with anyone. Least of all the scientists. Can you do me a favour? Go out on the street and start sinking your teeth into molten tarmac and see if that suits your appetite. If you don't like it then STFU your point is useless. That really isn't fair. There is a huge difference, because sex feels good, regardless of who you are with. Even a straight guy would probably enjoy sex with another guy, if they just relaxed and let themself enjoy it. However that does not make them gey, since most people do not want that sort of relationship. It is kind of like saying you were created to masterbate with your right hand. You might like your right hand, you might be better using it, but its a choice. It is a preference. I am pretty sure with a little practice you would enjoy doing it with your left hand just as much. That said, who really cares which hand someone else uses?

[ClouD]

With passionate anger, Your text-wall is full of presuppositions. Ridiculous topic that, through pseudo analysis and bias logic, poses to have found a problem that can be pointed at. Ought to. Should. Obviously.

[lucid4sho]

Idol, could you sum up in a few sentences what the point of this thread is? Pardon my misunderstanding, I just honestly don't quiet understand what you are trying to say or why. I don't think I'll have anything to contribute to this topic, I've never studied homosexuality, I'd just like to figure out what you are talking about.

[Scatterbrain]

I have had the notion for a long time that there is something fundamental in human nature about uniting masculine and feminine aspects in relationships. I don't know for certain whether this is instinctive, but it's obviously culturally and in most cases socially prefferable for one partner to adopt a masculine role, and another a feminine role. You're making a large assumption, attraction and relationships are too much more complex than that. By your logic it would not be possible for a normal man to be attracted to a dominant or tomboyish woman, that's obviously not true.

[Xaqaria]

Your view of the situation is extremely black and white. Even if a balance between masculine and feminine is fundamental to healthy relationships, these qualities do not fall neatly along the lines you are trying to draw. Furthermore, whether someone is masculine or feminine has very little to do with their sexuality. There are effeminate men and masculine women who are heterosexual. There are masculine men, and feminine women who are homosexual. There are people who balance masculinity and femininity, and there are people who are attracted to many different types of people of both sexes. Ultimately, your theory is baseless; because whether or not someone is masculine or feminine often times has nothing to do with who they are attracted to anyway. There are plenty of heterosexual couples who are both rather feminine or both masculine. There are couples that alternate roles depending on the context. The simplistic structure you are trying to apply to the question comes off as contrived and ignores the diverse nature of human relationships, and makes it sound like you are just trying to justify beliefs or feelings that you have that deep down don't seem rational.

[Idolfan]

Idol, could you sum up in a few sentences what the point of this thread is? *Extended Discussion* If I believed I had all the answers I would not have bothered to make this. It's only if it could be deduced that homosexuality is 'unlucky' that any action would need to be taken (to warn gay people). By the time someone realises they are gay, it is not as if they have an encyclopedia of loveology written in their heads. If the facts are that they will have difficulty, they ought to know it otherwise it can prove very depressing for many gay teens and adults. Most of all, it can be extremely confusing. And, if they start to pull their heads out en masse with the delusion that they have failed because their sexuality is 'sinful', then we will have a lot of unneeded shame complexes and very likely much more fuel for the fire of religious homophobia. This is why I care about it and it is important! @ Scatterbrain and Xaqaria: You raise a really good point. But, I am making generalisations. Usually, the masculine archetype is attracted to the female archetype and vice versa. That is a well known normality, it is overwhelmingly common. There are exceptions to the rule, but we cannot ignore tendencies. All the trend tells me is that, if the trend is true, which it is, then in theory there ought to be many problematic relationships among homosexuals. I'm obviously going to have to study a lot more about how relationships work. I don't see the point in trusting my own future experiences because then I would be left with results biased around the people I just happen to have met. I still don't think that whatever complexities there are override the masculine / feminine tendency. Unless, it is not natural and it is completely shaped by society. But to find that out we would have to wait a long while or conduct some very unethical experiments. Ps. Xaqaria, your sig has epiphanied me!

[Ladon]

Well... Just what I want to say: I find it odd that there are feminine gays and masculin gays... And the other way around as well. I'm not trying to be too stereotypical here but you can mostly see about a guy that he's gay when he's acting feminine and from a lesbian when she's overly masculin. I'm not saying ALL! And I'm not implying one is 'good' and one is 'bad'. Relationship wise I find that very... very odd. Now what are they attracted to? That makes me think if there are guys out there that want a masculin lesbian xD Are they drawn to behaviour of a sex, or the genitals... o.O That's basically what my question is about if you disect it :p

[Lucid_boy]

The problem is that although the masculine-feminine scenario is much more common (obviously) it seems to me that you are assuming that because this is so, a set up like it is required for happiness. This is a groundless thing to think! The reason gay men have problems with relationships is because for most of human history homosexuals were strongly condemned, even persecuted. This causes them to have trouble with there own sexuality and trouble(in some cases) finding gay men to have relationships with. I would say that gay relationships are no more difficult (once a partner is found) than straight relationships. People, wether gay or straight, are basically the same. The have the same emotional and social needs and need the same thing from relationships. To say that gay men are psychologically women in a male body seems ignorant to me. I am gay and clearly see a mental, emotional, and psychological diffrence between myself as a male and people of the female gender. In short, there is no real proven basis that man-woman is needed for happiness, in fact the millions of happy gay couples seem to state the opposite.

[Idolfan]

To say that gay men are psychologically women in a male body seems ignorant to me. I am gay and clearly see a mental, emotional, and psychological diffrence between myself as a male and people of the female gender. Human sexuality is so fucking confusing... I really don't think any of this makes sense to me anymore. I take in what you say and then it's like "So why are these types of people not attracted to women?" and then I look at myself and see myself having feminine type fantasies and wonder if I could be the same way but I'm obviously not because it's been proven by science my brain's on the masculine end of the spectrum. I really should have saved this for a time when I actually understand physical and emotional attraction. I'm just afraid that it is going to be the most uncertain, ridiculous and labourous thing to research ever.

[mowglycdb]

Being girly or not has nothing to do with being gay or straight. Each person male and female has a balance between masculinity and feminity sometimes not so balanced yes. If you want to research Idolfan , research on yourself it's the best way to know. and Honestly you are being disrespectfull , because you are trying to define people that are gay and lesbian as diferently , when we are all the same in the core, yes I am gay. OMG... I'm... GAY??????????????? : shock: I suppose I should be the LAST person to come up with this stuff! And anyway, WTF? That's the most retarded set of scentences I've seen in a good while. "If you are gay you are just gay". And then you go on to say that it's not predetermined? WhAt Do YoU mEaN? I also want to remind you that I haven't started ANY threads on homosexuality other than ONE in the 'Help!' section. So stop pulling stuff out of your arse because it is bullshit. If you want to prove a point find me one (within a few months of posting). And that does NOT include references to the subject, the thread must be ABOUT homosexuality. IdolFan, HaRd_WiReD didn't say if "YOU" are gay, he said you as in everyone or talking to an audience.

[Marvo]

Human sexuality is so fucking confusing... I really don't think any of this makes sense to me anymore. I take in what you say and then it's like "So why are these types of people not attracted to women?" and then I look at myself and see myself having feminine type fantasies and wonder if I could be the same way but I'm obviously not because it's been proven by science my brain's on the masculine end of the spectrum. I really should have saved this for a time when I actually understand physical and emotional attraction. I'm just afraid that it is going to be the most uncertain, ridiculous and labourous thing to research ever. Why do you put so much thought into it? That's what really concerns me. There's no grand secret to learn. Go make out with a guy. If you like it, then you're gay. Go make out with a girl. If you like it, then you're bisexual. It's as simple as that.

[Idolfan]

Why do you put so much thought into it? That's what really concerns me. There's no grand secret to learn. Go make out with a guy. If you like it, then you're gay. Go make out with a girl. If you like it, then you're bisexual. It's as simple as that. I make a big thing about it because it doesn't make any sense, and I make a big thing out of anything that doesn't make any sense. I have also said that I have no need to have these experiences other than for my own business, because applying them to what I'm trying to understand will fuck it up. I would have to date almost every person in the country to get a reliable perspective. The fact that it pertains to my life makes it excusable to rant on about I guess. But really, this was never the point of the thread.

[Idolfan]

and Honestly you are being disrespectfull , because you are trying to define people that are gay and lesbian as diferently , when we are all the same in the core, yes I am gay. I just wrote a much longer response and then pressed ESC by accident. There is no God. I like the way you capitalised Honesty as if to differentiate it from honesty, because you have unwittingly done it quite appropriately. I am not being disrespectful. Gays and lesbians are different, it's a fact. They are different in terms of their sexuality. Which means they will face different problems in life. Usually when a certain group of people faces a problem it can be wise to actually try to analyse this. I have Asperger's Syndrome, and this gives me certain social imparements (gays and lesbians, if (pay attention to that if) what I am proposing is correct, would also have social problems). And if people like you were protesting that there should be no research done into it because I was 'the same as you in the core', I would punch yer face. And as for Hard Wired, okay that was a mistake on my part (lazy english language mutations). But it was pretty dumbass of him to say it because it's not as if I was proposing that there was anything more complex to the sexuality itself. I was saying that it would be more complex SOCIALLY. This is the thing Hard Wired didn't understand and never addressed. Once again, if someone made a thread saying, "The Real Problem With Asperger's Syndrome" I would understand what they were saying straight away and I wouldn't be suspecting that they were out to change me, because obviously that's not possible. Oh wait... Hard Wired said it was didn't he? Well bugger me with an ironic rod...

[Marvo]

I make a big thing about it because it doesn't make any sense, and I make a big thing out of anything that doesn't make any sense. I have also said that I have no need to have these experiences other than for my own business, because applying them to what I'm trying to understand will fuck it up. I would have to date almost every person in the country to get a reliable perspective. The fact that it pertains to my life makes it excusable to rant on about I guess. But really, this was never the point of the thread. What doesn't make sense? That your sexual orientation is in flux? That happens to nearly everybody and has something to do with hormones. Some people more than others. It'll be over when your grow older.

[katielovestrees]

This "theory" or whatever you want to call it sort of reminds me of a friend saying that when gay people have sex they use toys or parts that are inherently representative of the opposite sex (ie. a dildo looks like a dick - sorry if I'm being blunt or inappropriate, just the best way to explain my thinking), which isn't really what you're talking about, but I thought I'd throw that out there because it could serve as some sort of "physical" evidence, I suppose. Anyway, my thought is this - that these supposed "male" and "female" characteristics aren't. They're just human characteristics. While men seem to possess certain ones to a greater extent than women and vice versa, this doesn't mean they can't be found in different proportions in different people. In other words, what Xaqaria and lucid_boy said - these qualities are sought by all humans seeking a relationship, and aren't dependent on their orientation. To those of you making this about Idolfan's sexuality: this isn't the point of this thread, please don't be so petty.

[Idolfan]

What doesn't make sense? That your sexual orientation is in flux? That happens to nearly everybody and has something to do with hormones. Some people more than others. It'll be over when your grow older. It doesn't make sense to me that I can be of a masculine archetype and still be attracted to men. And it makes even less sense that I could be of a masculine archetype and actually be seeking another masculine type person. That is the confusing part (about people in general, not myself). The first instance tells us that at least the part of the brain that deals with physical attraction must be different from whatever determines your gender personality, but I am completely lost as to the second instance. I am saying it doesn't make sense because it really doesn't. Usually, two partners compliment each other in their features. How can this happen when they are of the same gender psychologically? That's what I am trying to figure out. You've got to admit it is a bit of a mystery. With all that said, I was reffering to it not making sense that homosexual relationships would have just as high a success rate as heterosexual ones. And if it does, I really want to understand how and why.

[Idolfan]

This "theory" or whatever you want to call it sort of reminds me of a friend saying that when gay people have sex they use toys or parts that are inherently representative of the opposite sex (ie. a dildo looks like a dick - sorry if I'm being blunt or inappropriate, just the best way to explain my thinking), which isn't really what you're talking about, but I thought I'd throw that out there because it could serve as some sort of "physical" evidence, I suppose. Anyway, my thought is this - that these supposed "male" and "female" characteristics aren't. They're just human characteristics. While men seem to possess certain ones to a greater extent than women and vice versa, this doesn't mean they can't be found in different proportions in different people. In other words, what Xaqaria and lucid_boy said - these qualities are sought by all humans seeking a relationship, and aren't dependent on their orientation. To those of you making this about Idolfan's sexuality: this isn't the point of this thread, please don't be so petty. Physical evidence... buh-dum-tish... A very sane reply. Only the people involved can truly know and understand I guess. This leaves a big gap for the people who are perfectly balanced and compliment themselves. Who are they to find? Or are these effectively omnisexual demigods who can love anyone? Hey, no insult. That would be pretty slick! My mind just threw up... I wonder, what comes first for homosexuals? The physical attraction or the emotional attraction? I mean in development, not in relationships. This would give a big insight. For me it was the physical aspect but then the emotional aspect came on like a pile of bricks (as if I always could have loved boys).

[Marvo]

It doesn't make sense to me that I can be of a masculine archetype and still be attracted to men. And it makes even less sense that I could be of a masculine archetype and actually be seeking another masculine type person. That is the confusing part (about people in general, not myself). The first instance tells us that at least the part of the brain that deals with physical attraction must be different from whatever determines your gender personality, but I am completely lost as to the second instance. I am saying it doesn't make sense because it really doesn't. Usually, two partners compliment each other in their features. How can this happen when they are of the same gender psychologically? That's what I am trying to figure out. You've got to admit it is a bit of a mystery. With all that said, I was reffering to it not making sense that homosexual relationships would have just as high a success rate as heterosexual ones. And if it does, I really want to understand how and why. The human brain has not been completely mapped yet, and there are still lots of things that we don't understand about it. Your theory, from what I can hear, asserts that we know all there is to know about the human brain, which we clearly don't. Simply put, all the questions you're asking cannot be answered with a proper scientifical answer right now, because nobody really knows what the answer is. I believe I'm a bisexual myself, and what I've found, is that I put on a manly personality and appearance when I'm headed for girls, and what I want in a girl is just a normal feminine person. When it comes to boys, I put on a feminine act and appearance (when I say appearance I mean body language) and what I want in a boy is pretty much the same. Doesn't make sense I guess? With all that said, I was reffering to it not making sense that homosexual relationships would have just as high a success rate as heterosexual ones. And if it does, I really want to understand how and why. First: Why do you need to know this? Why do you need to know so much about all this? Why can't you just live with it? Second: Nobody can give you a concrete answer.