• 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.
CLOSE THREAD after post.

Absoutlely not. Ur either gay or not. Some people don't no yet what they r due to denial or not wantin to dispoint but u cant fuck with science. Ur gay or ur not. No grey
 
-=SS=- said:
Nature wants heterosexuality and nothing else.
Click to expand...

So if you are infertile, and aren't able to produce children, you aren't what nature wanted?

What's the point of heterosexuality if you aren't going to reproduce?

Claiming "nature wants heterosexuality and nothing else" is bizarre IMO.

transit012 said:
^ What's your point? They also found a common gene among pedophiles, research it.
Click to expand...

The overwhelming majority of pedophiles and rapists are male.

Saying "research it." and not providing any evidence to poorly stated ideas indicates you should follow your own advice.
 
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...

Why does somone always bring paedophilia into the argument, as though homosexuality and paedophilia are in some way almost the same. Allowing for the moment that there may be genetic/physical/hormonal/emotional/behavioural/psychological/situational causes of paedophilia and homosexuality, whatever, just for the sake of argument, what makes you think they're all that comparable? Where a paedophile finds themselves aroused sexually by pre-adults, whether pubescent, pre-pubescent, male, female, whatever, whether he can do anything about that response or not, that I think is a primarily physical response. There is undoubtedly a psychological component to it, but the desire is I think primarily physical: simple sexual gratification in the body of a minor. Never heard much mention of paedophiles desiring long-term, exclusive, emotional relationships with the kids they have sex with, or claiming that the act expresses something fundamentally integral to their sense of self that would be damaged by the repression of it. That's not true of homosexuality. Sure, you'd have the exact same kind of purely physical, sexual response of one man to another, simple sexual gratification again, but that's not the main thing. This might come as a surprise to some, but homosexuality is not defined by sexual acts in the slightest. It certainly ain't defined by sodomy, a practice lots of gay men don't even indulge in as it goes. Sex is just the outwardly visible physical expression of the desire for an emotional, loving relationships with another man, and it's the inner emotional aspect that truly defines it. I think you're tending to confuse the one with the other because you see them both primarily only in terms of sexual acts, and whether you choose to indulge them or not. I'm not sure that makes for a valid comparison, and we've not even got started on the other issues of consent, abuse of power, lasting harms, etc that would differentiate them still further . . .


-=SS=- said:
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 to have abnormal behaviour. The changing of the mental illness status of homosexuality through political pressure and not science proved they want this normal stthemselvesatus regardless of what the truth actually is.

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.
Click to expand...

In evolutionary, biological imperative type terms, sure, but the instances of sex for the explicit or even sole purposes of reproduction form the tiniest, tiny part of the sum total of most people's adult sex lives and experiences as to be almost here nor there. Sex for the vast majority of us the vast majority of the time is for its own sake and its own pleasures, as the expression of an emotional / mental / physical connection between two people. For the most part, intellectually, physically and emotionally sex serves a purpose that's completely unrelated to the reproductive function, if not downright antithetical to it, contraception for instance and what have you. In what sense can sex for purposes other than strictly biological reproduction be defined as either natural, or unnatural at all? Are some practices more natural than others? M penetrating F anal sex? Oral sex any which way? Dressing up in corsetry or rubber bondage gear and flogging the arse of each other with a cat o' nine tails amid a torrent of verbal filth, what? If sex is only natural when it's about reproduction, what are we to make of this vast intellectual edifice we as a human species have managed to build on top of it, the vast industry that seeks to service it, and the equally vast industry that seeks to police it, socially/politically/morally? Seems more accurate to say that as an evolved, higher-functioning, species able to out-think our DNA and whatever chemical processes are going on at a cellular, biological level that sex for the self-aware like us is as much to do with the expression of our inner selves in pursuit of intimacy and sensual pleasure, and has a lot more explanatory power.


-=SS=- said:
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!
Click to expand...

So if it's all just mental phenomena, and the mind is not the brain what's happening to cause all these physiological responses? Dilated pupils, flushing skin, accelerated heart beat, heavy breathing, increased blood flow to erogenous zones and the increased sensitivity of them, hard-ons, penile or clitoral, fluid production, seminal or vaginal? How exactly is your non-local mind ( whatever that means? ) engaged in a purely mental phenomena plumbed into the physical response of the body? Clearly there's a deep, direct link between the two. Whether that link is learned in childhood or innate, a conditioned response or genetic predisposition, makes not a blind bit of difference, nor do the specific, particular instances of whatever it is you find most aesthetically appealing. What triggers it at it's broadest, loosest, common denominator most directly will be a certain kind of woman, a certain kind of man, or both. You can learn to like all kinds of things given enough practice, turn pretty much anything into a fetish, but I don't think you can unlearn the things that sexually arouse you. Using a previous analogy we'd just reverse program paedophiles if that was the case instead of keeping them in jail for the public's protection for years, wouldn't we? Despite the claims of some religious groups and dubious therapists there hasn't been much evidence of success trying to turn gay men and women straight.
 
BongFish said:
No I don't think it's a choice however I do think many more people than like to admit are bisexual but just repress their homosexual side, which is entirely possibly to choose to do.

The majority of girls I know accept a homosexual side but very few men do. I think the spectrum of sexuality for the male and female population looks prety similar but there's unfortunately more pressure on men to supress their gay side.

Also as regards to the choice thing I read about a very interesting study in newscientist about weather homosexuality is nature or nurture. They found that the more older sisters a boy has the higher the chances of them being gay are which indicates an influence from the mothers hormones during pregnancy. They canceled out the possibility that just growing up with girls could make you gay by taking into account boys that grew up with step sisters from a different mother.

Unfortunately I don't have a link but I think that this is pretty convincing evidence that sexuality is at least part nature.
Click to expand...

Sometime I like to dress up in a white bear costume and call myself Rupert, you know what I'm sayin...
 
alasdairm said:
they're not the only ones...

:\

alasdair
Click to expand...

Hey i'm just going on simple observational evidence. Nature is all about procreation, not pleasure.. pleasure is the bait to ensure procreation. Anatomy dictates male-female interaction. Any other form of sex is just man's rationalization for pleasure. Simple ^_^
 
i've tried gay (male on male) oral out of curiosity twice and neither time my dick got hard and it felt wrong. basically i tried being bisexual and it didn't work so based on my own experience i would say you can't choose to be gay.
 
Homo sex is normal natural and genetic. It is a sexual preference like all preferences that was selected for during our evolution because of benefits it conferred.

Homo men were unlikely to reproduce and became helpers undistracted by their own offspring devoting their parental instinct towards close relatives children guarding feeding so on just like a woman might BUT with the body of a male. It would be exceedingly beneficial for any genetic lineage to include a certain percentage of gay men as helper class as this would raise overall fitness.

There is also the utility of homo sex males being used in a similar manner to castrati in that they are 'safe' males who can be trusted not to fuck all your females while you're away hunting leaving the gay man as a guard or so on.

Homo sex was also used by het men and women for bonding and/or conflict resolution where the lesser male would act out the part of a woman by being the 'bottom'.

Sexual preferences of all types are genetic. If genes did not control sexuality then how could sexuality evolve for evolution requires hereditary functions to pass on the information. Reproduction thus sex is the basis of evolution in animals and if you think evolution sculpted the eye yet for some unknown reason leaves sexuality alone then...

Oh and the person claiming our minds are not of our brains, and doesn't give evidence to back up this absurd claim, you cannot be helped.
 
-=SS=- said:
Hey i'm just going on simple observational evidence. Nature is all about procreation, not pleasure.. pleasure is the bait to ensure procreation. Anatomy dictates male-female interaction. Any other form of sex is just man's rationalization for pleasure. Simple ^_^
Click to expand...

and gays procreate- being gay doesn't mean you cant have babies8(

also being gay and being a paedophile are two different things. you can be a straight male paedophile who fancies little girls or a gay male paedoephile who likes little boys.

nature has lots of gay animals like swans...
 
treezy z said:
i've tried gay (male on male) oral out of curiosity twice and neither time my dick got hard and it felt wrong. basically i tried being bisexual and it didn't work so based on my own experience i would say you can't choose to be gay.
Click to expand...

WTF???? You sucked a dick to test if you were gay????? Not once but twice???? that is super gay, gayer than gay.
 
Heres my take on the su ject at hand--

Who cares if its a choice. Its what some people obviously like. Im not gay but if you are that affects me in no way at all and anyone who it bothers or makes it a point to try and stop you is a stupid fucking cunt who needs to get drug from the back of their nascar bumper sticker covered pickup truck

I also think that gays deserve to be able to get married, they deserve to be able to taoe advantage of getting health insurance from the others job and shit like that that straight ppl can do.
 
Australopithecus said:
Homo sex was also used by het men and women for bonding and/or conflict resolution where the lesser male would act out the part of a woman by being the 'bottom'.
Click to expand...

Homo sex for conflict resolution? Are you sure? I've never got into an argument and then wanted to have sex with a man before, and, in the words of the great and wise DMX...

"I show no love, to homo thugs
Empty out, reloaded and throw more slugs
How you gonna explain fuckin a man?
Even if we squashed the beef, I ain't touchin ya hand
I don't buck with chumps, for those to been to jail
That's the cat with the Kool-Aid on his lips and pumps
I don't fuck with niggaz that think they broads
Only know how to be ONE WAY, that's the dog"

yeah... only know how to be one way... that's the dog! *barks*

EDIT: I feel like you need to see the music video to get it... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CqXgs-7ico
 
Last edited:
^ LMAO!!!! I heard getting fucked in the ass is instrumental in resolving conflicts, especially in prisons, keeps the bloods and crips together.
 
transit012 said:
WTF???? You sucked a dick to test if you were gay????? Not once but twice???? that is super gay, gayer than gay.
Click to expand...
no i got paid twice to let dudes suck my dick one time 50 one time 100 and didn't get hard either time. so actually it really wasn't out of curiousity it was for cash but i was like "shit i'll try to enjoy it" and did not enjoy it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top