Discussion in 'Human Science' started by ArtofWar, Dec 20, 2005.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
It's good to have a whipping boy.
Don't you agree? A "weakness" to measure yourself against?
How did I condemn my own view?
Well, here is the sequence.
Not very attentive, are you GumBootSitter?
It's obvious you have this thing about being wrong. You don't want to be wrong. Ever.
I expressed that view myself. Without YOUR help, surely. What's so hard to understand about a person making a statement on their own, without having to respond to someone else?
I wasn't responding to anyone in particular. And it doesn't matter.
Refer to the thread about where people would like to live. I make the silly error of thinking Den Haag is the capital of the Netherlands, when it is merely the seat of government and of the Royal Family's residence. I acknowledge my error immediately.
The thing is GoneBattySister, I usually check my facts before posting, so I am not often wrong. Facts. You may have heard of them.(By the way, do I take it from your remarks that you like to be wrong? Interesting. Probably just as well. You seem to excel at it.)
Ophiolite and Giambatista. Hold it!
What do you guys really want to gain from this discussion? You two may not like each other, but for god's sake take your fight to private messaging.
Annoying, when people post crap, isn't it Bhudda1?
Especially, when they get away from the topic.....
I don't want to get into another never-ending discussion on what qualifies to be 'crap'. You seem to be too much oriented towards that sort of thing lately.
Besides, it's not very scientific! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
If you take a look through the thread I suspect you will find that GimmeButts&Titsa was posting pure off-topic nonsense, which I called him on. I am protecting the sanctity of your thread Bhudda1. You should be thanking me.
I have only read the first page of the six pages of discussion here, but trust me when I say I have invested many hours in what causes homosexuality, and it is NOT biological. There have been ZERO studies proving it to be biological or genetic or anything else.
Right now, to me, the most convincing argument for the cause of homosexuality is this:
The only way you'll believe me is if you'll read some books by psychologists whose specialty is homosexuality, and do some research on the internet.
Don't take my word for it, find out for yourself.
ohhh right. so your adice is to not believe what you state. i see. so the alternative is we go and get abused and see iof we turn QUEER?....what?
By thus excluding male-male sexual behaviour into a separate and a misnomer 'homosexual' identity, the heterosexual society makes sure that it does not have to deal with any of the issues relating with male-male sexual need, even when proclaiming to be an 'open' society. It's all shoved into the 'homosexual' ghetto. (The 'homosexuals' on the other hand feel powerful as they get to represent male-male bonds, which they do it in their own way).
The presumption is that male-male sexual need = homosexual. It is an extremely effective way to isolate the issue, and to leave no space in the mainstream society for its discussion or portrayal.
Take an example. If you want to talk about male-male sexual desire, you will be seen as a 'gay' writer and your book will be seen as a 'gay' book. This will make sure that no one touches the book in the 'straight' world --- what with all the pressures.
Not to mention that the 'homosexual' writers will deal with the subject in a very 'homosexual' way, and will only raise the issues that concern 'homosexuals'. It would be completely irrelevant for a young straight man struggling with his same-sex needs in order to be able to proclaim the much coveted 'heterosexual' status.
Anyone who attempts to violate this 'sanctity' of the heterosexual 'open and free' space by bringing up same-sex issues is promptly given the 'gay' label and is effectively side-lined. It is a 100% effective method --- that makes sure that no straight man tries it in the first place. There are very few men who get away with this (Alfred Kinsey e.g. example).
The 'vested interest group' has tried its best to label me as a 'homosexual' in order to isolate the things I raise as a 'homosexual' issue --- and to act as a pressure on any straight person who would 'dare' to support me. And this is just one of the reasons why I won't let them.
Sometimes, the best way to stop someone is by not getting into an argument with him.
Of course they haven't found a cause for 'homosexuality' but then they have not found one for 'heterosexuality' either. Does that make heterosexuality biological or psychological?
Of course both the concepts of homosexuality and heterosexuality themselves are socio/ political and not biological concepts.
This is a classic example of how half-truths can be manipulated to pass off as THE truth. But like I have said, half the truth is worse than a lie.
The abuse factor would be a typical scenario with a straight man --- but is not significant in the case of real 'homosexual' men.
Of course that people can be abused to become addicted to same-sex activities is a strong pointer that people believe that everyone is capable of having same-sex needs, but are 'protected' from this 'evil' by social measures.
Like I have already discussed in a different thread, most men have a sexual need for men --- which would be quite strong if allowed to be developed. It is hidden most of the times, and its intensity is also minimised for men through various psycho-social measures.
Feminine gendered males don't relate with masculine gendered males and want a different ideintity which those-that-like-men happily find in the 'homosexual' identity (what they're subconsciously looking for is a 'gender' (not 'sexual') identity distinct from 'straight' men).
Masculine gendered men (straight men) on the other hand fight with their same-sex needs (however strong they are) and disown them in order to protect their social gender. Most men are able to achieve this goal, and this is helped mostly by social measures that drive out, denigrate and stigmatize same-sex needs/ bonds, and make it out of bounds for straight men --- especially during the crucial adolescent stage when sexuality is developing.
And this is where the 'abuse' factor comes in. When straight boys have sex with men (you can call this an opportunity or an abuse, depending on how you look at things!) during their 'forming' years --- they experience the forbidden. And nature is really, really strong. Once they experience the positive feelings, the society with all its hostility would find it almost impossible to prevent the man from wanting to experience it again. He may still hate and hide it, but would be desire it consciously all his life. A small fraction of this may also join the 'gay' band, although they will be a misfit there.
Psychologists and Experts!!! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! They are there only to force 'heterosexuality' on people under a 'scientific' garb. I once read somewhere that the purpose of psychiatry is to help people adjust to social norms.
The above statement is only partly true --- and applies to straight men who have been 'abused'/ 'given an opportunity' by individuals. Thus if it is abuse it is 'individual' abuse.
Also note that"
(a) this 'abuse' happens only once but nature does the rest.
(b) Often the 'victim' willingly joins this 'abuse' fighting against all social odds.
But a greater truth that represents the majority is this:
CAUSE OF HETEROSEXUALITY:
The reason why people become heterosexual in most cases is one and only one:
Force and abuse by the society.
Note the glaring difference between the former and the latter 'abuses'. Note the following in the case of 'heterosexuality':
- It is primarily an institutional/ social abuse and force but also happens vigorously at the peer and individual level --- and thus has a far reaching impact.
- That it is always by force, and the 'victim' has no choice/ option. There is no question of 'consent' here --- even when it is 'apparently' given.
- That this abuse and force has to be kept up all of one's life (especially during the youth) or the person will denounce heterosexuality (not to be confused with male-female sex).
- That this abuse is never acknowledged. Not even by the 'victim' himself. Such is the fear generated.
This statement, however naive this is based on part-truths, although is a crude attempt at finding the 'cause' of same-sex behaviour.
Again this applies mostly to straight men.
When men who experience male-male sex in their forming years and are unable to forget the experience, try to fit into the heterosexual world they resort to masturbation as a way of relieving their same-sex desires, even when they fulfill their heterosexual duties. They are open to, and sometimes consciously seek superficial same-sex activities, but most of the time they resort to masturbation to relieve their sexual stress.
It is easy to establish a connection and jump to a 'cause'. But then I don't see any difference at all between this and the theories that 'science' passes off.
Where's the fun in that?
So the result of the discussion this far has been that the study linking 'homosexuality' to anterior hypothalamus is misleading and a farce.
Just like all the other studies conducted on these lines.
Their sole purpose is to 'other' same-sex behaviour as being 'different' and alternative, in order to maintain their isolation from the mainstream, and to show it as 'feminine' in order to keep the pressures of social masculinity on men.
In other words their sole purpose is to homosexualise sexual bonds between masculine/ straight men.
Well, this is interesting.
I think I already mentioned somewhere that many of the men enrolled in "reparative" therapy are already married.
Reparative refers to the attempt to make men (or women) with same-gender attractions divert that attraction to a more "useful" avenue of pursuit.
According to these groups (mostly conservative Christian, but they can have secular leanings as well) homosexuality is more "acting on" these attractions than actually experiencing the desires. In other words, you're truly being a homosexual only if you ACT on the "gay" inclinations, but if you're married to someone of the opposite sex, you're just a heterosexual "struggling" with temptations and desires.
Separate names with a comma.