Thread: Homosexuality, how can it not be considered an abnormality?

Originally Posted by Cacophony

Who cares?

those who have a moral/religious/personal bias against homosexuality or just "think it's icky"....

One thing to think about:

How do we know when an animal is homosexual or not? Just because an animal is humping on it's own kind or greets each other by moving their parts around, that doesn't mean it is homosexual.

Like the Bonobo monkey:
Somebody said they use it as a GREETING. Nothing erotic (or even platonic), just a greeting.

And just because "nature" does it, that doesn't mean that it isn't "natural".

Normal vs Abnormal

Gays are a minority amongst humans, and probably amongst the rest of the Animal Kingdom (although I do not know the exact statistics).


EDIT: And I, in no way, believe that a homosexual's "abnormality" is bad. I just consider it not something to promote, just to tolerate.

Originally Posted by UsernameTheRand

One thing to think about:

How do we know when an animal is homosexual or not? Just because an animal is humping on it's own kind or greets each other by moving their parts around, that doesn't mean it is homosexual.

Like the Bonobo monkey:
Somebody said they use it as a GREETING. Nothing erotic (or even platonic), just a greeting.

And just because "nature" does it, that doesn't mean that it isn't "natural".

Normal vs Abnormal

Gays are a minority amongst humans, and probably amongst the rest of the Animal Kingdom (although I do not know the exact statistics).


EDIT: And I, in no way, believe that a homosexual's "abnormality" is bad. I just consider it not something to promote, just to tolerate.

ugh..this has been covered already. Theres ones who do it for greetings, and others who do it for pleasure. If they do it for pleasure, how is that not homosexual?

I dont understand about your nature comment though...I thought the very definition of natural was something that occurred in nature...

of course, we shouldnt be promoting any kind of sexuality, as that would make it seem like the abnormalities of other sexualities is bad.

Originally Posted by UsernameTheRand

And just because "nature" does it, that doesn't mean that it isn't "natural".

Is that an intentional double negative? Because you just said that if nature does something, it's natural. Ergo, if homosexuality is found in nature (as has been established in multiple animal species as both an instrument of social conduct and of pleasure), then it is natural.

Gays are a minority amongst humans, and probably amongst the rest of the Animal Kingdom (although I do not know the exact statistics).

So, are all minority groups abnormal, then? Are Native Americans "abnormal" because they're in a minority? No. They simply have different characteristics. They're as normal as the next person.

EDIT: And I, in no way, believe that a homosexual's "abnormality" is bad. I just consider it not something to promote, just to tolerate.

So, if we don't promote homosexuality, what should we promote? Being straight? Hardly seems fair...seems more like a choice individuals should make. How exactly do you promote homosexuality, anyway?

Originally Posted by Mario92

How exactly do you promote homosexuality, anyway?

By the abolition of Section 28
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_28

Originally Posted by MementoMori

Indeed masturbation was considered highly "abnormal" at one time and now is almost accepted as a normal thing (this doesn't help one to procreate).

Masturbation is a part homosexual and part incestual, you can't try and tell me this is "normal".

Originally Posted by Thatperson

By the abolition of Section 28
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_28

Hmm, looks more like abolishing Section 28 ended institutional condemnation that was hampering education--not just sex ed, but banning any number of books that simply mention homosexuality. If ending that practice constitutes promotion, then I suppose if I were hitting you in the face and then stopped, I'd deserve a humanitarian award for not-hitting-you-in-the-face.

The amendment stated that a local authority "shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality" or "promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship".[2]

Aslong as this goes both ways, as in, both heterosexual and homosexual couples, I don't see a problem with it. There's no reason to say that one is better than the other.

I do agree that it should go both ways in primary school, but eventually sex ed is needed in secondary school, at which point they shouldn't be teaching homosexuality, in the same way they don't teach mechanophilia etc. It appears the government at the time recognised homosexuality as an abnormality (rightly so I'd say), and therefore not to be encouraged.

Homosexuality IS an abnormality. That doesn't meant there's something wrong with it.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Homosexuality IS an abnormality. That doesn't meant there's something wrong with it.

It's a minority.

Right, but those words sort of mean the same thing depending on where you are.

Who would ever want to be normal?

Originally Posted by Thatperson

By the abolition of Section 28
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_28

Section 28 is abnormal. It needed some normalcy beaten into it. Thank heavens it did.

Originally Posted by Thatperson

I do agree that it should go both ways in primary school, but eventually sex ed is needed in secondary school, at which point they shouldn't be teaching homosexuality, in the same way they don't teach mechanophilia etc. It appears the government at the time recognised homosexuality as an abnormality (rightly so I'd say), and therefore not to be encouraged.

I have so many issues with this...first off, I think sex ed should cover homosexuality, instead of only teaching straight sex. I'd go as far as to call that discrimination against gay people. Why shouldn't they also be entitled to the same level and relevancy of education as the next person? The teenage years is a time when many come to terms with their sexuality. The last thing they need is to be taught that straight sex is the only way. I'm not saying you go into schools like gay Hitler and force someone to go gay, but it should be a part of the curriculum. Note that being educated on a matter and being encouraged to engage in that behavior are two totally different things. I see nothing wrong with handing out a pamphlet on a play containing a gay couple. What the hell's wrong with that? And why the hell would you want to deny gay people equal rights? So they have a different lifestyle. If you feel threatened by that, to the point where you support the abomination that is Section 28, then you're a homophobe.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Right, but those words sort of mean the same thing depending on where you are.

Who would ever want to be normal?

Define "normal."

I like this and feel it's fitting now:

Originally Posted by Cartoon

There are people who are on the internet until 4am and you assume they're looking at porn but they arn't, They're reading about underground rivers and concrete graveyards and abandoned subway stations

Wikipedia FTW

Originally Posted by Bearsy

Masturbation is a part homosexual and part incestual, you can't try and tell me this is "normal".

I disagree. Masturbation is in its own category. Using such rhetoric you could say suicide is murder. I can see how you could say that though, I really hope that is not how you view masturbation though! lol.

Urgh, how is this thread still going?

Normalcy is an arbritrary measure of how often something happens, that has no real meaning beyond itself. Why does it even matter whether homosexuality is normal or not then? Why ask the question?

All it comes down to is how you define "normality". So what?