Heterosexuality is unnatural

Giambatista,

O.K. here's a post I have long been procrastinating but I should have done long ago. Let's see how well I have judged your situation. Please correct me whereever I'm wrong.

There are two reasons why I think you are 'straight' as far as nature is concerned. Of course by now you know that straight does not in the least mean heterosexual (vis-a-vis nature):

- You related vehemently with many of my key assertions, especially about masculinity and its pressures. Gay men are likely to feel the persecution by so-called 'masculine' men, but are not likely to feel the psychological pressures on themselves, as they conveniently distance themselves from the (masculine gendered) man's identity. Thus a truly gay man is not likely to relate with these issues.

- You have not mentioned that you have found a support system in the gay community which is very strong in the U.S.

A true homosexual person would usually be able to build a strong network of support system within this community, and thus escape the terrible isolation, victimisation and mental stress caused to straight men. (though by know means is the life easy for 'homosexual' men).

So, if you agree with the above analysis, we will call you a 'straight', at least for the sake of this analysis. A straight man is a naturally masculine man who is instinctively inclined to bond sexually with men --- whether or not he has a sexual interest in women.

You do have some very strong ideas/ concepts that is typical of a heterosexual society (including that of homosexuals) but I concur they are because of social factors --- including social conditioning.

There are two points I've noted with interest:

a). Your being genderless --- i.e. neither feeling particularly masculine or feminine.

b). Your disinterest in sports.

Here's my analysis of both the situations as per my theories. Please tell me how relevant you find them.

a). Your being genderless --- i.e. neither feeling particularly masculine or feminine:

Straight men are born with a natural masculinity which is originally in an undeveloped unformed form. This needs to be cultivated and developed as the person becomes an adult in order to become a fully developed masculinity in all its natural glory. (incidentally natural femininity is also likewise in an undeveloped form which needs to be developed!).

Adolescence is the natural time to develop this natural masculinity and the only way to do it is by bonding with other straight boys.

What happened in your case (and countless other men in your place) is that you were excluded psychologically and socially from your natural group --- of masculine/ straight men by artificially making heterosexuality a basic requirement. Most men in your place would fake or exaggerate their sexual attraction for women and hide/ suppress their sexual interest in men. After all this is what most straight men do when faced with a heterosexual society.

You also psychologically excluded yourself from other straight men, inspite of your natural affinity, because you were misinformed). Since you were left out from the straight group, you never got a chance to develop your masculinity. (That the others could only develop negative masculinity is a different matter altogether!). Your masculinity remains underdeveloped, suppressed and hidden within you.

If you had enough natural femininity things would have been perfect for you. The heterosexual society has designated a space for feminine gendered males who like males. It fits their heterosexual agenda. You would have gladly fitted in the gay community, would have cultivated and developed your natural femininity (though a lot of it would be negative and exaggerated!) and inspite of the social hostility would have found your people --- people with whom you could relate as a gender.

But since you did not have the requisite natural femininity (we all have some amounts of masculinity and femininity whether we are masculine gendered or feminine gendered!), you ended up being neither masculine nor feminine......

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

b.) Your disinterest in sports:

This is really interesting. Sports is indeed masculine --- but only participating in it. True heterosexuals often are interested in watching sports not participating. True straight men may or may not enjoy watching others play (though they will pretend to --- its a pressure of social masculinity) --- but they love playing or participating in adventurous activities.

Your disinterest in sports is closely related with your exclusion from the straight group (both by the others, but more importantly by yourself) and your yet underdeveloped masculintiy. You subconsciously kept yourself out of sports. Because you saw it as 'their' thing. You saw the men who played sports as different from you --- because they appeared heterosexual from the outside (and you took their image too literally!)

But if you could see those players as men who harbour deep inside them a natural urge to bond sexually with men, and if you knew that a lot of disguised and suppressed eroticism happens in athletic circles you'd start relating with those men and that could very well kindle an interest in sports/ athletic activities.

It's the same with army and other warrior/ masculine activities. If you grow up seeing these institutions as 'heteroseuxal' you may not develop in these things. Realising the true nature of these men, and relating with that image will change the entire picture for you, as I have noticed happen with other men.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Interesting analyses! Allow me a little time to respond adequately...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

To any self respecting solipsist it does.

 

Some of the reports are solid enough. Your interpretation of them is unscientific, subjective, flawed, misguided, just plain wrong. Your analytical skills appear to be on a par with those of a woodpigeon with brain damage. If you find that personally insulting wait till I get warmed up. The sort of bilge you are posting here is an affront to anyone of intelligence. I was initially amused by your position, but having read your so called proofs I am offended by your inanity. I disapprove of people who are stupid parading that stupidity publicly. Please stop it at once.

 

Hey Buddha just because you work with homosexuals doesn't mean all men in society are homosexuals - that's an absurd extrapolation.

 

You're right, James, it's a wasted effort and I apologize for the space it's taken. I have to say that it goes against my grain to see any self-serving fraud who is seeking nothing more than building up his own ego get away with it. My efforts were intended to try and expose him for what he really is just as I would do with someone who was trying to promote one of those Nigerian money scams. I consider Buddah1 to be in the same category.

But I'll certainly honor your request.

 

Besides, how are you supposed to respect the validity of his "evidences"??

 

Congratulations you are my new plaything.
I tried to resist but your stupidity just screamed out for attention.
It’s not often that this level of density is expressed so openly and I mean to take full advantage of it.
All you can do is ignore me.

True enough.
Although, having hindsight in what you call “natural”, I ask you to define what it means.

As far as I can tell all forms of intimacy are contrived and must be promoted and maintained by a series of mind-numbing chemical reactions many call emotions.
The mind must be inebriated into communion since its natural tendencies are to avoid and exclude all foreign elements from its being.

As far as sexual intimacy is concerned the motives are quit clear and straightforward.
Procreation forces a period of tolerance so that insemination and genetic mixing can occur. Its length is determined by biological factors and maturity speeds, specific to each species.
In the particular case of heterosexual human attraction the period fluctuates between 7 (…year itch) and 10 years- a period sufficient enough to bring a single offspring to a relative state of self-sufficiency.
All other forms of sexual attraction are aberrations created by some hormonal imbalance or developmental deformity during gestation (I guess) or some genetic mutation and enhanced by the other attractive element in human interrelations that is necessitated by human frailty and makes communal living essential to survival.

True again.
Although here you insinuate a repression of homosexual tendencies, to fit your thesis, when the real repression is in the full extent of what it means to be male.
Modern males are made into females and females into males in a social effort to enforce equality through uniformity.

Here, also, the ‘nature’ aspect of behaviour is ignored to promote the ‘nurture’ influences, giving the impression that humanity is dictated by choice rather than by determining natural tendencies, from which man must escape or learn to control, in order for him to attain free-will.

Maleness is “oppressed” because its nature becomes a threat to the stability and harmony of the whole.
The feminine aspect of human nature are promoted and idealized, making repression a matter of survival and mental disorders a matter of course.

I would say that this experience is one limited to a specific segment of the male population which, like yourself, feels a pressure to conform to heterosexual norms.
In general I find that sexuality is restricted and minimized, prevented from being expressed fully or honestly, in all human beings.
Sexuality, being a fundamental element of the human condition, becomes a force to be controlled and diverted to benefit the common good.

The elimination of female sexual power through moral systems and religious institutions –something that has been reversed recently and which has resulted in the decline of the family unity – has been an essential cultural breakthrough which domesticated the human animal and made it more productive and passive.
Without it civilization would be impossible.

With the advance of technologies which make sexual encounters merely diversionary with little consequence and with the decline of the family unity and the deterioration of moral standards – constituting a period of decadence – and with the growing obsolescence of sex as the primary method of insemination, the rise of alternative lifestyles have become more acceptable and tolerable, especially when they promote a more docile, passive mind.

In the case of homosexuality, the stigma attached to it, not only culturally by also naturally, has been obliterated by the emancipation of women, making gender primarily a matter of nurturing and not a matter of nature and making femininity the desirable social behavioural pattern.
In a world where males are supposed to be more feminine and females more masculine, it is easy to see when homosexuality is but a slight variation of the acceptable norm; a variation still resisted by certain groups attached to the pasts dependence on the significance of the family unity, centralized around the artificial monogamous union between the male and a female procreative structure.

The rise of the authoritative role of government as playing the part of dominant male within a social context has made masculinity an obsolete, archaic role, not only outdated but undesirable for the harmony of the whole.
Institutions begin taking up the role of male, relegating all others into female positions of passive acceptance.

It is evident that the mind has no gender and is not defined by such labels. Yet we cannot ignore the participation of hormonal effects, as they are determined by sex, on the development of said mind.
It is part of the human condition to find value and self-worth through exhibitions of sexuality and access to sexual fulfilment.

I don’t know if I am part of the 5% minority but that’s one of the most absurd things I’ve ever heard in my life.

In this case all you can say is that this represents your own experience and the rest is based on speculation.

The inter-relation between human being always contains an element of sexuality but this is not always attractive nor is it always friendly.

Heterosexuality is not a human construct.
This prejudice stems from the feminist movements which have sought to make sexuality a matter of detail or physical attributes with no psychological or mental effects.

In the surge towards equalitarianism all is levelled into a soup from where each mind can pick and choose his/her characteristics as if character was determined primarily by immediate environments and not by historical ones.

Homosexuality has become a viable alternative and can now be argued as being ‘natural’, mainly due to the efforts of equalitarian pushes aiming at making all diversity a cosmetic detail.
In the push to make females just like males and to interpret sexuality in ways that do not constrict free-will, the doors of reinterpretation have been left wide open to allow any crack-pot to claim anything he/she wishes about sexuality.

Truth is heterosexuality is a fundamental part of the natural procreative process, in which homosexuality has emerged as a symptom of its decline.
What occurs in nature as a form of dominance and expression of status has been translated, in our modern levelling times, into an alternative to nature.

The ancient Greeks saw marriage as the technology which harnessed mans sexual energy to the common good. In the same way one makes a wild field more productive through farming, marriage focuses sexuality into more efficient and productive avenues by restricting sexual freedom and by focusing sexual energies through morality and institutions.

Homosexuality has no productive element to it and so becomes a natural dead end where sex is merely used as an expression of choice or diversity.

Again you are taking a personal experience as being a general one.

If anything heterosexuality has been constrained and repressed from being fully expressed.

Monogamy being the most obvious form of repression.

In fact religions have urged to love one another in contradiction to their natural inclinations.

But in this case you do not mean ‘love’ in the emotional sense but love in the sexual one.

You have yet to prove that anyone is being coerced into heterosexuality.
Nature has her own methods of establishing behaviours.
Sex exists only for the purpose of procreation and for no other reason.

In fact an individual must be made to perform his natural duty through hormonal pressures.
There is no purpose or reason to homosexuality.

To claim that heterosexuality must be imposed is the most absurd thing I’ve heard in a long time.

I thank you for offering me such entertainment.

[deleted]
The only thing I repress is [deleted].

[insult deleted]

It is controversial to claim an intellectual superiority of males, on average, but if one needs more proof of it one can just witness this feminized male mind and its intellect.

It is evident that gender is partially determined by cultural standards that force certain exhibitions and contain it to acceptable parameters. But to claim that nature has no part in it is ludicrous and evidence of a mind grasping at anything to free itself from its own nature, even before it fully knows or accepts this nature.

Social systems are but reflections of natural ones.

 

I eagerly await for someone to show me where and how my analysis is wrong. I will thank you for taking the lead. I'll change my stand and assertions as and when you do that.

 

Please refer to the thread: 95% of men have a sexual need for other men. You can only claim otherwise if you disprove my evidences.

 

Huwy, I have been ignoring you for too long.

I find your posts very very childish, and I find it best to ignore them.

You try to win arguments by trying to get personal or by making accuses that have no relevance to the topic. That is not a very scientific approach.

If you want to be taken seriously, grow up. You are not a kid anymore.

As for my working with homosexuals, I don't think I have made any such claims. Though I did work sometime with homosexuals that work is only 2% of all my work.

You can't win an argument by trying to distort facts and making these larger issues personal.

 

I hope I am not repeating something from the wrong thread, but it is not at all surprising that homophobes experience sexual arousal from seeing gay sex. This I think is an absolute prerequisite for being a homophobe.

 

It is not at all difficult to expose a lie --- although you may need to give some time and efforts. A real scientist will do it in a jiffy.

And truth on the other hand is not dependant on anyone's credentials. Truth speaks for itself.

 

Yes, and I have often seen this happen in real life. In fact I have not seen someone who shows such hostility to male-male sex who does not harbour a strong feeling himself. This is something that needs to be further probed to ascertain the real depth and breadth of male oppression.

There are several reported examples of this behaviour besides the research studies.

It is difficult to decide whether to despise these guys or to pity them because after all they are victims of social conditioning.

 

I despise AND pity them.

Dammit. I really can't make love with men. Maybe it's because of this conditioning. I don't really find most of them desirable, and among the ones I do find desirable, why not just be friends? Why does sex have to be a big concern? This oppression even has me thinking of doing such and such when I actually don't desire it. I like having friends who i don't think of having sex with. It's even a turn-on, if you can believe that. This doesn't mean I have to demonize sex. It just is, I can live with it, how about that?

 

Of course by 'gay' I mean a feminine gendered man who is open about his sexual need for other men --- whether this attraction is in conjunction with a sexual attraction for women or not.

Gay or homosexual according to my definition (and as per the practical usage in my country) does not refer to masculine men even if they have an exclusive interest in other men.

 

Of course by 'gay' I mean a feminine gendered man who is open about his sexual need for other men --- whether this attraction is in conjunction with a sexual attraction for women or not.

Gay or homosexual according to my definition (and as per the practical usage in my country) does not refer to masculine men even if they have an exclusive interest in other men.

 

So you're basing your idea that 95% of men have a sexual need for other men solely on your personal + work experience? Although you yourself admit that you haven't yet conducted even one single survey!!!