• S E X
    L O V E +
    R E L A T I O N S H I P S


    ❤️ Welcome Guest! ❤️


    Posting Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • SLR Moderators: Senior Staff

is homosexuality a choice?

Status
Not open for further replies.
†∆†;9021618 said:
the fact that we even need to debate this is really sad.

why on earth would an estimated 10% of the people on earth choose
to subject themselves the to discrimination, harassment, and misery that
is being gay?
Click to expand...

This post holds much wisdom
 
I wish I was bisexual... Sexual orientation is definitely not a choice.
 
It's a key sociological puzzle as to why most humans aren't highly promiscuously bisexual, like our Bonobo chimp cousins.

ebola
 
bromance said:
And by the way, studies don't mean a lot. I could make up a study to prove that you can become gay based on what you eat.
Click to expand...

A common misconception among those who don't work in a scientific field--studies don't work that way. You can't just make something up, call it a study and have it published. Peer-review is a very important process and helps ensure scientific integrity and legitimacy.
 
Yes Homosexuality must be a choice because its so different then your own sexuality and your own ideals that you somehow felt the need to question its place in your own reality and whether its even possible for someone to be born so different then your perfect self.
 
As a bisexual man my own experience tells me that sexual orientation is not a choice. If it was I'd perhaps have succeeded in my attempt to choose not to be bisexual. I knew from my mid teens that I had a definite curiosity in that direction, something I found difficult to acknowledge fully in part because I'd been on the receiving end of homophobic taunting from even my mates and felt the stigma of it. What they were seeing that led to the taunts, despite my best efforts to keep that curiosity hidden did concern me, and caused me to wonder at times if I might actually be gay. Not what I wanted to be, genuinely fearful of how hard I'd find things if anything should ever confirm to my mates that I was anything other than straight, only straight, couldn't be anything but straight. I went into pretty deep denial, repressing that part of me that found some men attractive and fantasised about another guy's cock all the way into my mid 30s. As far as I was concerned I was straight.

Things began to change when I joined a swinging site where you could pretty much be whatever you wanted to be so long as it was honest, free from judgement. Decided to be open to whatever opportunities presented themselves, eventually getting invited to a house party where most of the guests would be at least bisexual determined to put my curiosity to the test, hoping that might get it out of my system. Turned out I enjoyed the plays I had with a couple of guys more than I could have imagined, finding it a huge turn on and something I wanted to explore more. My final acceptance of that came as a huge relief, and I began to self-identify as bi from that moment on.

Point is, at no point did I ever choose to be bi. I was bi in fact whether I willed it or not pretty much from puberty and couldn't change that, despite my best efforts to try and be straight. The physical attraction and sexual response to some men is just there regardless, and can't be switched off. The only choice available to me was whether I'd choose to accept that and explore it, or choose to reject and repress it, and I'd already found that option didn't work so well.
 
I think, like someone above said, that the argument really does fall very quickly into semantics. On the one hand, I believe that who one is attracted to (which is a key piece, but still only one piece, of sexual orientation) is something which people have very little control over. However, the specifics what one finds attractive ARE very much influenced by environment, background, peers, etc., many of which also are influenced by choice(s).

Then, from there, if you believe in the Kinsey scale of sexuality, which I do, most people lean towards either homo- or hetero-sexual in terms of who they are attracted to. Even many people who identify as only homo- or hetero-sexual still feel some degree of physical attraction towards the same sex. This must mean that on a daily basis, they are CHOOSING not to act upon those attractions. The most likely reason for that is because of social pressures. If people are supposed to be able to resist peer pressure for other things, then certainly they are also able to resist peer pressures for their sexuality. That means there is choice involved as well - one either chooses to act upon what feels, or bury it down because the reward doesn't seem worth the consequences.

So, yes, I believe the degree (if any) or how much one acts upon or excludes their feelings of attraction does involve some choice. But I don't believe that people have much conscious control over who they are attracted to, and I don't believe that people should be expected to have sex with anyone that they don't feel attracted to. So, if someone really feels that they are only attracted to people of the opposite sex, or only to people of the same sex, who am I to tell them differently? So, even though I think there is some choice involved, I don't think that that fact applies any kind of moral aspect to the act. As long as sex/relationships are consensual and the people involved are happy with the situation, there is no immoral sex/relationship.
 
firebrand said:
i get annoyed when minorities are allowed to discrminate and use terms that the majority would fry for. for example; you use the word "straight", (which is an antagonism for normal) i use the word queer,(which is YOUR own definition) and i get lambasted for it.

its about time minorities got on with thier lives and stopped pervading the lives of those who dont want to know about it.
Click to expand...

if you dont want to know about it then why are you here talking about it:\

look its a choice for everyone to have sex and a relationship as opposed to not having sex/a relationship, its not a choice who you find attractive though. do you see the distinction?
 
Last edited:
Having feelings is not a choice, acting on your feelings is a choice.

A pedo has "natural" feelings towards young boys does this mean that he has no other choice but to act on these feelings?
Same applies to homosexuals. They have a choice.

When a penis enters a beautiful vagina it produces life, what a beautiful interaction indeed. Why deny this choice?

She should leave you with no choice: http://keenanevans.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/09_irina-shayk_03.jpg

I don't know how this guy can get you a better erection than her: http://besthairremovalguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/bear_man.jpg
 
Last edited:
^ OK then let's see how long YOU can CHOOSE to go without sex before your sex drive proves more powerful than your CHOICE to not have sex. 8)
 
transit012 said:
She should leave you with no choice: http://keenanevans.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/09_irina-shayk_03.jpg

I don't know how this guy can get you a better erection than her: http://besthairremovalguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/bear_man.jpg
Click to expand...

Hahahahaha, oh WTF, dude, notwithstanding the undisputable fact that some would find the guy attractive, some would find the girl really quite average, talk about apples and oranges. Not gonna turn this into a pic swapping thread but let's at least compare apples with apples. Something more like these perhaps.

Emotionally I could only ever bond with a woman, and that's how I know I'm not gay, but some of the guys on that thread provoke a sexual response bigger than any amount of hot girls ever could because there is also a mental component that is as arousing intellectually, if not more arousing than the physical act of fucking / being fucked by a guy itself, which for the record is about the hottest, sexiest, filthiest thing I've ever experienced, 3sums, 4sums, too-many-bodies-to-count-sums notwithstanding. The mindset that comes only with M on M sex is of a fundamentally different character to that experienced with heterosexual sex, and there is an erotic charge to a hot guy's body and cock that again is different absolutely in character to that usually experienced. It's not necessarily better, or inferior, because direct comparisons of two fundamentally different things are impossible and meaningless, but it's that that I crave as much as the physical acts available themselves. They are two uniquely, distinctly seperate aspects of my sexuality, each of which as as valid as the other, and as integral to me as the other.
 
Johnny1 said:
^ OK then let's see how long YOU can CHOOSE to go without sex before your sex drive proves more powerful than your CHOICE to not have sex. 8)
Click to expand...

so how does your argument stand when a Pedo justifies his act by saying that his urges became "more powerful" than his choice? Pedos justify themselves the same way as homosexuals.

Feelings are not a choice, the act is.
 
Scientific evidence proves more and more that a particular gene, at some point, cascades the human being into homosexuality. Even besides genetic research, endocrinology is proving defining links that it is not up for choice. There really shouldn't be a question about this given that vast amount of research .

For a BL commoner to go into this as a domestic approach is simply ridiculous.
 
^ What's your point? They also found a common gene among pedophiles, research it. No one is arguing the genetics of it. What some are arguing is the choice or sexual act itself. See the difference? Pedos may have the genetic disposition for being attracted towards young boys. Are you telling me it's ok for them to act on these emotions? Gays keep saying they don't have a choice, but they do, the same choice a Pedo has when he sees a young kid. To suggest that homosexuality is not a choice is a real weak argument.

I'm just trying to stimulate thought and discussion without any bad intention towards any member from the gay community.
 
Last edited:
I really do not buy the genetics/born this way argument, or that the drive is encoded in the brain tissue. It is a learned behaviour/mind-set that is imprinted onto the mind during the early years of development post-birth. Nature wants heterosexuality and nothing else. I've got nothing against homosexuals but this incessant drive to prove it to be "normal" behaviour is just annoying as hell. If you want to be scientific about it that's great but we already know they have a pre-determined conclusion before even beginning an investigation! No one is going to prove themselves to have abnormal behaviour. The changing of the mental illness status of homosexuality through political pressure and not science proved they want this normal status regardless of what the truth actually is.

If you're consenting adults and doing it behind closed doors, fine. Got no problem with that. But this drive to prove it to be normal before the verdict is in.. give it a rest! The facts are pretty clear anyway.. we're here to reproduce and homosexuality doesn't cater to that, hence, it is not natural.

The rationalizations and "evidence" that gets put forward is pathetic at times, like the penile response to homosexual image study for example. I mean science is composed of humans and humans are not always completey impartial, but when it comes to homosexuality and science, going on known history, that impartially flew out the fucking window!

Sexual attraction is clearly a MENTAL phenomina, and not a biological or biochemical one. You project on to the man or woman that which you desire to see, or in the case of the paedo the child, the animal lover the animal etc. Now unfortunately science/psychology says the mind is/in the brain but this is bullshit, and this limits our perspective on the issue because we are (apparently) tied to that conclusion. But the mind is not the brain, it is a seperate thing somewhere non-local. Until that gets recognized no one is going to properly understand sexual attraction because that's where it takes place!

Something in the childs development leaves an impression on the MIND that shapes his/her sexual orientation. Usually it is a trauma, but there could be other scenarios too.
 
transit012 said:
so how does your argument stand when a Pedo justifies his act by saying that his urges became "more powerful" than his choice? Pedos justify themselves the same way as homosexuals.

Feelings are not a choice, the act is.
Click to expand...

I think pedophiles should be locked up just like other dangerous people, or, if it works and they so choose, chemically castrated. They have an immutable mental state and have a compulsion to harm children.

I do not think most people can control their sexual urges. The sex drive is too powerful. Homosexuals are compelled to have sex with the same gender just as heterosexuals are compelled to have sex with the opposite gender. It's not a choice, it's a drive that comes from within and once established cannot be changed. But there's nothing wrong with it because it's between two consenting adults.
 
transit012 said:
^ What's your point? They also found a common gene among pedophiles, research it. No one is arguing the genetics of it. What some are arguing is the choice or sexual act itself. See the difference? Pedos may have the genetic disposition for being attracted towards young boys. Are you telling me it's ok for them to act on these emotions? Gays keep saying they don't have a choice, but they do, the same choice a Pedo has when he sees a young kid. To suggest that homosexuality is not a choice is a real weak argument.

I'm just trying to stimulate thought and discussion without any bad intention towards any member from the gay community.
Click to expand...




To the first part, there are many people who are the genetics of it, and I thought, perhaps in my ignorance this was part of the topic of discussion. However I believe you may be guiding reference's to support your point.

The comment based of a gene causing pedophilia is misleading, at best. What you are referring too are the preliminary findings of a "progranulin gene mutation", by scientists at a University in Italy which states that alteration of this gene leads to the rare neurodegenerative process similar to Alzheimers and dementia patients, making the patient lapse into innappropriate behavior that may or may not pre-dispose them to pedophilia. Progranulin plays an important role in sexual development that is disrupted, but doesnt necessarily cause a behavior to occur. The predisposition, however, is certainly correct, it seems.

If I am to compare a "pre-disposition" to pedophilia to from a neurodegenerative disorder to a person who is homosexual, that analogy doesnt work as the study in Italy is referring to is a a) disease. Homosexuality is not caused by or pre-disposed from a disease. b) Pedophilia is symptomatic of progranulin degradation. Homosexuality isnt a "symptom" of anything. c) Multiple systems of functioning of defect in those with progranulin degradation. The only (and a few minor subsets) change in someone who is a homosexual is their sexual orientation.


The ladder part of your argument I'm not sure what to make of since you are speaking of "acts" between biology. Furthermore, you further remove yourself from any intrinsic decency in argument by imploring a moral function: is it "right" for a pedophile to act in such a way, when I am talking about science as stated the differences between forms of dementia and homosexuality, you choose to include morality and popular religious statements regarding thoughts on homosexuality. Sure, homosexuals have a choice in having sex, just as a pedo has a choice to have sex with a child, however your argument borders on a disgusting travesty of human-rights and decency.

The evidence for homosexuality not being a choice is, in fact, astoundingly large. Just a few things I could find ...

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?i…
http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/n…
http://www.livescience.com/health/080617…
http://www.medpagetoday.com/OBGYN/Pregna…
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17904…



Any person with a sense of decency should allow a homosexual to have sex and not be compared to a child molester.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top