Heterosexuality is unnatural

I'll keep that question in mind and try to ponder over it......I would like to think about it.

But it shows that we are already at the next level of discussion --- as to what kind of society should we strive for? Maybe you can give your views about it?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I think I was more trying to illustrate the concept that surveys and studies that attempt to quantify sexual attraction are highly variable, but that the numbers can be quite high, regardless of whether it's moderate or exclusive attraction.

I tend to care more about people that lean towards exclusive attraction, because first of all they're more like me, and second of all, they're pretty much the only ones who would even give me chance, and from what you can see by my grand example, that chance is slim. This has really nothing to do with being a part of gay culture or identity. I said earlier those things are foreign to me. I Giambattista am a completely separate category in my own right!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

My seeming propensity for dividing people into categories of greater and lesser does in some way come from my society, but it's also how I am personally. I generally regard most people as separate from me, so I'm used to cataloguing people according to various criteria.

But, I think I'm getting away from my original intent here. So I'll be quiet.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

One thing we can do is to stop referring to male-female sexual desire as heterosexuality and male-male sexual desire as homosexuality. These are loaded terms and unnecessarily complicate and politicise these simple needs.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Isn't it amazing! we live world aparts from each other --- both in terms of distance and culture, yet you so much relate to straight male behaviour in my society. Shows that not only our basic natures are the same, our pressures are more or less the same too.

I have written down detailed accounts of these counselling sessions. Noted down each and every detail as I was told during several conversations. I think it would be a good idea to post the detailed accounts here.

 

I think it would be a good idea also.

Have a question or two regarding "John" that are important for my edification/enlightenment so if you could please as accurately as possible try to answer them

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

:

What was the reason, in short, that you originally saw him for?

How did this story come out? Do you have a habit of asking questions that get to these feelings, or was it something that was nagging/bothering him? I'm guessing it was a fairly significant event to him, but I'm only guessing...

Does he look back on it with indifference, or regret? Does he wish he had been kinder, or does he feel justified in acting like he did? Obviously he at least had the courage to talk about it.

It appears he wished things had progressed farther than they did. What are the moral implications of his repressed desires for this man? You say John was married, and I'm assuming he had children. He doesn't feel that "fooling around" with another man is cheating? What are his feelings towards his marriage? Is it merely a social contract?

Does his wife know about this? How did she react if she knew?


Well, I hope you can clue me in here, because I was mulling this over in my head and these questions came to mind!

Thank you!

 

WOOPSY!!!

I forgot the fact that he was 16 when this occurred, so he obviously wasn't married at the time! So forget the question about cheating on his wife, but the one about his wife's current knowledge of this is still important!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

AND HERE IS SOMETHING ELSE THAT'S KIND OF CURIOUS ABOUT MEN IN AFGHANISTAN...


WHICH ILLUSTRATES THIS BIZARRE NEED TO BE "MANLY" BUT AT THE SAME TIME BARELY DISGUISES THEIR INTEREST IN OTHER THINGS...

This is an excerpt from among several articles about this subject in Afghanistan where a journalist has gone to visit a man in hopes of learning about homoerotic relationships in the country:

The conversation was stilted, and perhaps they needed to be put at ease as much as I did. Munir at times translated as I asked about life under the Taliban. This broke the tension, and several men brought out photo albums.The men who had gathered together were a masculine bunch. Munir’s brother, who I’ll call Abdul, was a military martial arts teacher, Syed an auto mechanic, and several were bodybuilders. Virtually all of them had fought against the Taliban.

They proudly showed me photos from the army, including one showing Abdul parachuting out of a helicopter. Each man waited expectantly as they showed me pictures, searching intensely for my reaction. It was as if each wanted to prove his bravery, and with each photo, I felt as if I were being wooed. Courage against the Taliban seemed to be their erotic calling card.

They were also clearly interested in talking about sex. One young man asked about English slang words, and offered the tip that the Afghan word “milk” also means masturbation. He then talked about prostitutes, mentioning a Chinese restaurant that fronts for a brothel, clueing me in to the open secret that Kabul is rampant with prostitution, tailored to the needs of foreign workers. This man was 20, married with children.

I asked him how in a traditionally Islamic country he knew such things. He responded by challenging me to tell him about my wife or girlfriend. Finally, the young man said, “When we meet a man who does not have a wife, and does not have a girlfriend, we call him a sissy. What is another word for that in English?” One of the men, I’ll call Ali, a brutally handsome man with wildly wavy hair, then put his arm around me and nudged closer. He played with the muscles on my arms, comparing them to his own, his other hand rubbing his crotch.That was when the 20-year-old man simply blurted out, “Munir said you like to do homosexual things.” I refused to answer.

I felt vulnerable, even if the mood was jovial. I asked once again how they could be open about such things in Afghanistan when it seemed so conservative, at least to outsiders. One young man chimed in, “Not under the Taliban, but Afghanistan is a democracy now, we can talk about anything we want.” I couldn’t figure out where all this talking was leading, and worried that maybe my curiosity, a travel writer’s virtue, had finally gotten the best of me. We danced around topics until I understood that nobody meant me any harm.

Several men insisted I sleep there, Munir’s brother being the most persistent, letting me know how happy he would be if I lay beside him. “If you stay here, you are sure to have a ball,” he said. Still, I decided I should go. Munir and Abdul drove me back into town.

They seem to be a rather primitive culture, almost childlike.

A number of social scientists and commentators suggested the Shariah laws against women revealing their faces and the segregation between the sexes was the major culprit for rampant male-male "interest" and an unusual amount of pederasty.

I believe you mentioned this type of "Western rationalization" of the situation. Maybe that's the truth, or maybe it's even MORE true that these conditions merely bring out this attraction which is actually very natural?

Although historically, in Greece, there wasn't any law that women had to be veiled, but still pederastic relationships seemed to be fairly common... This seems to be a matter of great dispute: homosexuality and male-male intimacy in antiquity. The people that probably marginalize it the most are religious, especially Christian, fundamentalists...

 

Anyone feeling pressure to be “heterosexual” should first find out if he/she is one, in the first place.

Modern life makes us face multiple artificial predicaments.
It is a sign of our times that a heterosexual male is becoming, more and more, an ambiguous gender identity which is supposed to be attracted to females behaving like, or wanting to be just like, males, or an idealized representation of one.
Likewise a heterosexual female is supposed to desire a more feminine male or, at least, one possessing the character and behavioural traits most associated with femininity.

This makes the distinction between heterosexuality and homosexuality merely a matter of plumbing, in that the femininity or masculinity of an individual is becoming more a structural identification rather than an actual one.

So, it isn’t hard to understand where contradiction might cause ambivalence.
For if a heterosexual male is supposed to desire a female acting and functioning no different than a male and a heterosexual female is supposed to desire a male acting and functioning no different than a female and if, similarly, a homosexual male and female desire those of their own sex that exhibit characteristics of the opposite sex, then the line between homosexuality and heterosexuality has become nothing more than a penis and vagina preference.

At the end of the day, though, what happens behind closed doors is that each reverts back to the behaviour that comes more natural to one, despite cultural demands and political manifestos.

Only through sex can the true essence of the other be approached, either through the loss of self-control due to passion or through the exposure of personal fantasies which reveal internal truths, beyond social pretence and cultural necessity.

 

Mind your language pal --- that's the heterosexual/ homosexual talk

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

. These other things are not apart from true masculinity.

 

First of all, I'll say that you westerners are WEiRD! And I actually feel angry at having to put right westerner's interpretation of lives closer to nature. And how you ruin our culture with your stupid sexual orientation.

Let me try to explain this complex situation created by a westerner in an eastern setting.

Men have a lot of sex with other men in Afghanistan, but a lot of their values ahve been influenced by Britishers who ruled them for centuries.

In some parts of Afghanistan however male-male sex is still institutionalised -- but only in addition to marriage. But that's only left in small pockets of Afghanistan -- not all over. And marriage is a must, if you are a man and get an erection. That's all you need to have to get married. It's not really to fulfill your sexual desires --- its for reproduction. You have other avenues to fulfill your sexual desires both for men and women.

In any case, the word 'homosexual' in eastern cultures is used only to refer to a transvestite male who is promiscous and uses her anus as vagina to recieve sexual intercourse, as an assertion of her social femininity. It's a very degrading word and using that for a man is to dishonour him.

You westerners with your stupid notions about sexual orientation go there --- including the gay ones who go freak out in that culture --- and tell them they are all homosexuals. The 'heterosexual' ones show their usual contempt they are used to back home --- and say they are not 'homosexuals' (as if the natives are!). This has a negative effect on their own fluidity and they start using heterosexuality --- at least at the outset for asserting their masculinity. The problem is you guys have money and technology and just 'appear' to be more powerful to these men stricken with poverty. They value those with money.

In most parts of Afghanistan, and other oriental places, sex with men is common in the peer group -- but there are rules which are subtle but every one knows them. You have to maintain a certain outside demeanour. And the pressure to 'prove' that you can do it with women is always there. No one asks you to love them. They will think you're queer if you do that!

The western gay men go there hoping to find a 'gay' paradise -- which it is not. And this guy who went there must be typical 'gay' --- the feminine/ meterosexual kind who have no idea about the masculinity roles prevailing in those parts (they hardly care about masculinity roles in their part of the world!). So men in these parts make fun of them, jeer at them, and still want to sleep with them. It's all very understandable to me. Of course men are also angry and insecure about the fact that these western people (in the garb of science and sociology) go back to their countries and call them homosexuals and even feminine. They want to clearly distance themselves from the true homosexuals.

On the other hand if a straight (meaning masculine) guy goes there --- even without a girl or a wife (that was just meant to downgrade him -- it's a weapon they can use at will!) and who shows interest in men (but respecting the cultural norms and compulsions of social masculinity codes of conduct, will be treated as one of them. Of course, you are not supposed to sleep around or you will be suspect too.

It's not really about whether you can do it with women or not, in essence it's about whether you're masculine or feminine. It's your gender orientation that matters not your sexual one. A masculine gendered man who is solely into women will be sensitive to the masculinity roles and codes of conduct which queer men will not be.

 

Don't you think heterosexuality is rather weak as a quality if it can be traded in for the other sex just because of veils. Muslim men have the option to marry more than one wife, even if we say that extramarital sex is difficult. Surely, a truly heterosexual person will find solace in that rather than trying to have a relationship with a man.

You westerners are a CRAZY lot!

 

buddha,

do you class having sex with only women to reproduce heterosexual?


peace,

 

Of course I don't. That's natural. And so is having sex with women for pleasure. To an extent I'm also willing to consider emotional bonds with women outside the purview of heterosexuality, if they are not accompanied by an inability to sexually and emotionally bond with men.

 

Evidence from the nature (animals)

This is one of the strongest evidences that supports my contention.

According to the ground breaking research by Bagemihl --- based on data accumulated from work done by other scientists over a period of 200 years……..amongst mammals the instqances of reported same-sex activities is extremely high --- between 90% - 100% (as in the case of the Bonobos one of our nearest cousins!)…..E.g., it is about 94% amongst the Giraffes. Imagine, the national geographic channel has been making out as if the only kind of interaction that males have amongst themselves is when they bang their heads to mate with the females.

In fact males in the wild often show their amorous need for each other through wrestling and jostling (for the scientists though they are only practising for the big fight for the female --- the only reason why males are supposed to exist).

Noone has collected a data for this……because heterosexuality is taken for granted and does not need a cause --- but it seems quite a lesser number of males in the wild ever mate with females than is projected. But the only available evidences whow that the number of males who mate regularly year after year – is quite, quite low.

Now, the last that I heard was that humans are mammals too!

 

Mind your language pal! I may live in the west, but I certainly don't believe every thing that comes out of a Western scientist's mouth.

It appears that these people simply have to prove themselves in a different way then in the west, but they STILL HAVE TO in one way or another. I know you've apparently said that's what masculinity truly is, but why? Why
is the way in which they do it any better? Maybe it's not extravagant and elaborate as it is in a place like AMerica, but it still exists in any case. Instead of football, beer, and easy whores, it seems like they've built a holy shrine to guns! Not the best trade-off, is it? No. It's not. Maybe you see it as superior or more natural in some way, but I see them as being far too primitive.

Well, I personally had NOTHING to do with inventing any labels, nor have I imposed them on any unsuspecting foreigners. Like I've said before, "gay" and "homosexual" have rather vague and fluid definitions. They do not always mean that a man is a "sissy" or "effeminate". To many people including myself, those two words simply mean I prefer my own gender over the opposite gender. Some people like both genders nearly equally. Those people are generally called "bisexuals" although even that word can have several meanings. What's wrong with coming up with words to describe behaviors? I see YOU had no problem saying that "gay" means effeminate, even though plenty of us disagree over that definition. So why is it MY fault that non-Westerners INSIST on misinterpreting what words mean?

They love to be with other men. Fine. They want to touch, kiss, do other things with men. Fine. But they need to be married in order to get away with these things? Is this characteristic a strength, or a weakness? It seems to me that they NEED women more than they actually WANT them. They don't sound like they're any better than the rest of us.

Of course I think heterosexuality is weak because it caves in under moderate pressure. I don't feel as these sociologists do that these men are behaving this way solely because they weren't allowed to see women, let alone date them.

Although I remember one of the men commenting how he wished this person was a woman. And another claimed that he WANTED to marry a woman, but how does he know which one when he can't even SEE them? Now, are these comments coming from their hearts, or are they merely saying what's expected of them? I can't tell. Were "western" ideals coercing them, or is it their own culture? I don't know.

Just remember when you say "You Westerners" that you're talking about alot of different people, some of whom aren't very western in their ideologies (or eastern, to be honest). Let's not be so accusatory, please!

There is no category for my kind. We're hoping to start a colony on Mars some day so we can bitch about the temperature and lack of oxygen!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

And remember, maybe you get worked up over this subject (YES you DO!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

)

but try to remember that you refer to YOU PEOPLE and YOU WESTERNERS and YOU GUYS quite a bit, but there's a LOT of people being included in those statements and accusations. We are NOT ALL RESPONSIBLE for these things you're describing, regardless of where we live!

 

Giambatista, I was not getting at you when I used the term "Westerners". I was getting at the same forces that have oppressed you.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Also, lest anyone should accuse me of being a racist --- I mean westerners as in 'cultural' not as in 'race'.

But that does not subside my anger! :bugeye:

 

Pre-Christian west has a lot to teach the world. And I guess Christianity came from the east!

 

Okay, I understand.

 

Isolation as a strong pressure tactic to heterosexualise straight men

That's one of the strongest pressures exerted by the society --- to make you feel isolated. For masculine/ straight men, to be part of the men's group is a strong biological need, and is related to their need to bond with men. Bonding with men is the primary drive of men, just like the primary drive of women is procreation. (Man-woman sex is not on the priority list of either male or female).

To be excluded from the men's group is a fate worse than death for most men, and the roots of this go back to the tribalistic times when if men failed to prove their manhood (not their queer 'ability' to have sex with women but real manhood!) they were not accepted as part of the men's group. The person then led a very isolated and disempowered life, with no rights or access to community resources. Probably, he couldn't find a male lover, neither had any chance to procreate (if he wanted to, i.e.).

To be excluded from the men's group is to never be able to develop and cultivate your natural masculinity which means you'd grow up into a disempowered and genderless person (this is I think the case with you Giambatista!) --- or worse with fake social femininity. Because male bonds are extremely important for developing positive natural masculinity which is a life enriching, even sustaining force.

The heterosexual 'society' manipulates this natural fear of men to force or train men to be heterosexual. It cunningly creates an artificial social environment (and it uses all its sophisticated institutions – and actively employed crooked measures) where it is believed/ shown that sexual need for men happens only in 5% of men --- who are a different class altogether. Add the other baggages with this --- that these men are basically feminine (further add to it the persecution and denigration of feminine males!), that thy are queer, they are committing sin and a criminal offense (in my country we still have a law that criminalises sex between men. It was given to us by the western powers that rules us), a family shame, a dishonour, representative of a weak character --- and one would realise the extent of pressures that men face to be 'heterosexual'.

I think what we should strive to find out is, the exact ways in which this great lie is created and maintained/ propagated.