It is amazing how there is an endless supply of ignorants who are willing to use their first post on the board to demonstrate that they’ve not even read the thread they are posting in nor spent any time researching an issue before spouting their nonsense.
You might be surprised, fuel. There’s a fellow I’ve know whose been a good friend since we were about 10 years old. We went to high school together, but we lost touch after we graduated and went off to different colleges. I caught up with him several years ago and we resumed our old friendship. That’s when he told me he was gay. I think there were a couple of reasons I didn’t know when we were in high school. First of all, neither of us was popular enough to date. Second, in those days (the early 1980’s) in the small town we lived in, homosexuality wasn’t even something we knew about except possibly as an insult. That’s not exactly an incentive to come out of the closet.
Regarding female homosexuality, you might be interested to learn that about 100 years ago, around the time of the Women’s Suffrage Movement, there was a phenomenon where two women who set up housekeeping together was known as a “Boston Marriage” which referred to two women setting up housekeeping together. Here’s a link with more information. It’s not known how many of these were actually between two lesbians and how many were simply between good friends. Remember, back in those days, in some states women weren’t allowed to own property, were very limited in what jobs they were to do, and it was assumed there had to be something wrong with an unmarried woman.
If you’d like more firsthand information, I strongly recommend Esprix’s Ask the Gay Guy threads. I’ve learned a lot from him and others here, and I haven’t seen a question he and others won’t answer if it’s asked out of a genuine desire to learn.
buck8998, all I can do is suggest you re-read this thread and others. If you then persist in your belief in the face of evidence to the contrary, well, as you said, “it is a choice.”
I firmly believe the fight against ignorance starts at home, and I’ve found this place a wonderful way to get rid of it.
CJ
Hmmm. You are, of course, entitled to an opinion, as am I and everyone else. However, I’d make one observation, as courteously (since you requested that and good online manners dictates it anyway) as possible: One’s opinions should be soundly grounded in the facts regarding the subject of those opinions, to the extent possible. It doesn’t even matter that your opinion conforms to the general consensus, provided that it is based on facts. This is what’s generally termed an “informed opinion.”
Now, as I’ve reiterated already, while I am not myself gay, I have read extensively and dialogued with a number of gay people. And their consistent testimony is that they did not choose to be gay, and could not choose not to be gay. Granted that they make a choice to have sexual contact or not in every case where there exists the possibility to, that’s not what we’re talking about – the consistent usage of “gay” is with reference to self-identification and orientation: For a man, “I am gay” does not mean “I have sex with men” but “I find men sexually desirable and consider myself as a part of that subset of humanity who identify as ‘gay.’”
I think I’d grant that how open and how activist one is is largely a matter of cultural influence and personal experience – it took some startling events in my own life to make me into a straight man who is a strong activist for gay rights, and a large portion of the gay people on this board can testify to harassment and discrimination as contributing factors to why they felt they must speak out. I do not buy your idea of “being gay for attention” except in this wise – that there are those who feel attention must be drawn to the widespread abuse that gay people suffer, no matter the cost to them personally, thanks to what they’ve been through.
And the classic question that someone always poses to people who claim that “being gay is a choice” is apropos here as well: Can you decide, right now, that you will no longer find women sexually attractive, and start finding men desirable? That a nice set of breasts will repel you, and an erect penis and hairy chest will turn you on? As an experiment, try and do just that for a one-hour period.
So, in brief, you opt to ignore the statements made by many gay people, like myself, who affirm that they did not chose to be gay?
On what grounds do you think that statements made by gay people on the “choice” issue can be ignored?
All right, Homebrew! I’ve learned a lot from you, too.
CJ
Before I even read any responses, I would like to retract and apologize for my calling Fuel insane. His statements may be insane, but calling him so was out of line. My apologies.
Esprix
I would wonder why you would take the word of someone who had met an individual over the word of that individual themself.
In spite of psychology’s claim to science, this field of expertise really begins with certain unanswerable questions which must be answered before a psychologist or psychiatrist can proceed to apply their method. Take the controversial area of clinical depression – one psychologist will suggest it is the result of environmental factors, another, a chemical imbalance in the brain. The second psychiatrist has asserted an absolute answer to an unanswerable question – specifically whether mind is resident in brain – and that psychiatrist has proceeded from that basis.
This is why I’m so skeptical of psychology. As with all the social sciences, philosophical opinion, prescribed methods, and ideological viewpoint get heavily mixed together with observable fact. I would rather give more credence to the subject themself, than to the expert pondering said subject from a distance.
We’re getting into an epistemological debate here – what is the most valid source of knowledge? I hold research based on hearsay, even by trained experts, to be of less value that direct observation of a phenomenon. Ultimately, I consider it arrogance to explain to a person what they really feel, because it’s what they must feel to fit a certain psychological model.
(That goes for all the monolithic models – Fuel’s assertion that everyone is born heterosexual, the popular theory that everyone without exception is inherently bisexual, and another popular theory that suggests that both heterosexuals and homosexuals exist, but bisexuals are confused members of one or the other. I see no problem with asserting that inborn sexual desire varies the way hair or skin colour varies)
But there is tremendous danger in asserting that apparent knowledge is true, because it’s all we have to go on. That’s how it sounded to me when you suggested that the numbers varied from culture to culture because they appeared to vary. Also, it was you who introduced the question of numbers – in my first post, I simply argued for the existence of homosexuality in every culture, not a far-fetched claim at all. I’ve been doing some pretty extensive reading on homosexuality outside the modern West lately (trying to escape my own eurocentricity), and I have yet to come across a culture where it didn’t exist.
And to that last point I’d agree. That subject is equally open to debate.
Of course, if heterosexuality and homosexuality are both conditioned, that leaves two possibilities, both of which are troubling.
The first is that human beings are inherently bisexual – that is, that heterosexuals or homosexuals are simply people who have been conditioned – either partially or totally – by environmental factors. But here we have all the same problems we have in trying to prove that “human beings are wired for heterosexuality.” There are exclusive gay people (and exclusive heterosexuals) even in cultures, such as among the pre-Hellenistic Greeks, where bisexuality is the encouraged norm. There are animals which engage in exclusively homosexual behaviour, even when opposite-sex partners are available (and no one ever suggests it was the way they were raised…)
The second possibility is that human beings are inherently asexual. That is, our sexual desires are learned, not inborn. This is tremendously counter-intuitive, and the onus is on anyone making this point to prove it. It would imply an enormous difference between human beings and other animals, who have an obvious instinctive understanding of sex.
As for the possibility that environmental factors are partially, rather than totally, responsible, I have difficulty with this, though I can only speak anecdotally. I have yet to see any common factor in the lives of gays and lesbians I know. But if one wants to look hard enough for a “cause,” one will always find one. The assertion that environment plays a role always reminds of a scene in the movie But I’m a Cheerleader, where the inmates of an ex-gay camp debate the “root” of their homosexuality, and come up with things like “My mother wore pants to her wedding” and “I was born in France.”
Sorry Polycarp, but I believe you may have misunderstood. As IzzyR pointed out, I just meant that most people accept that heterosexuality is inborn, so it’s popularly believed that at least one form of sexual desire can be inborn.
When someone then extrapolates that homosexuality or bisexuality might fall into the same category, that’s when some people start making the argument that emotions and behaviour can’t be inborn, only physical traits. I was attempting to point out this double standard. My argument is that if one sexual orientation can be inborn – as is commonly accepted – then in theory all three can be.
Well, no, since bisexuality is defined as being attracted to both sexes, more or less equally, along a sliding scale - which leads us to…
Allow me to enlighten you. In 1948, Dr. Alfred Kinsey’s seminole work Sexual Behavior in the Human Male finally studied homosexuality in a serious way. Although some of his findings and research methods are up for reexamination (for example, he’s the one that came up with the 10% figure for the occurrence of homosexuality, which is still used as a benchmark but may or may not be accurate), the one lasting item he came up with was the Kinsey Scale. It is a barometer of measuring the degree of homo-, bi- and heterosexuality in a person. On the scale from 0 to 6, here’s how it would break down:
0- Exclusively heterosexual with no homosexual experience or response
1- Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual experience or response
2- Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual experience or response
3- Equally heterosexual and homosexual experiences or responses
4- Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual experience or response
5- Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual experience or response
6- Exclusively homosexual experience or response
I, for example, would be about a Kinsey 5.9 (I have an oft-touted thing for Sophia Loren and Seven of Nine, but I’d rather not discuss my perversities here! 
).
The world, it would seem, is not black and white.
Patently ridiculous. Homosexuality has been recorded in every civilization since records of civilizations began.
“Everyone else is doing it?” I doubt you’d find many gay men over the age of 50 who “went along with the in crowd” 'cause being gay was “cool.” :rolleyes: If it pushes your buttons, it pushes your buttons - there’s no choice involved. It’s like having blue eyes, or liking lima beans.
Then we appreciate you taking the time to listen to those of us who are gay, since you have zero experience in this area. Keep your eyes and ears open, and keep listening.
Esprix
Please explain to me how you chose to like lima beans. Please explain to me how you chose to have blue eyes. Please explain to me how you chose to be left-handed.
You can also choose uninformed ignorance. You can also choose to be a bigot.
Please explain to me how you reconcile your view when the fact that it goes against over 35 years of psychological evaluation.
Please explain to me where you got your degree in genetics so I may write to them and have them revoke said degree, as you obviously know nothing about the subject.
We’re depraved on account of we’re deprived?
Obviously you don’t.
Please explain to me how my loving parents and stable home life contributed to my homosexuality.
Indeed. Please explain to me why it concerns you so.
Please explain to me how you came to this point of view. (matt_mcl’s quote about the pointlessness of “disagreeing with rain” comes to mind.)
And yet you can come to the conclusion that homosexuality is wrong. Please explain this apparent contradiction.
Please explain to me why we’re not allowed to say you’re a bad person, but you can say homosexuality is wrong.
Please explain to me how this is possible, as it does not seem evident from your post.
Remember, the name of the forum is “Great Debates,” not “I’ll State My Opinion And Not Explain It When Asked.”
Esprix
I have been studying human sexuality with an interest in gay and gender-reversal roles for about two years now. In my two years of study I have discovered that gender-reversal roles have NOTHING to do with homosexulity.
I question this study’s findings heavily, because it goes against what I have found to be true in my years of study.
When I first started studying this, I must admit, I thought that those with gender-identity “issues” would be more towards the homosexual side of the scale. As in, males that prefer to be feminine or look or dress like woman would be more homosexual. However, I have found that this is NOT the case as all.
Just because a man enjoys “feminine” things does not mean that he will be gay. In our society we often assume that gay = feminine, but this is not true. There are plenty of other societies where gays are considered more masculine and manly than straight men.
My assertations are heavily supported, thank you very much. 
::goes looking for cites as she knows she will be asked::
I recently moved out here to Ohio from California, and I had to leave most of my books back at my parents house, so I can’t get the exact quotes or remember all of the names of the books that I read, but here are some that talked about it.
Christianity, Social Tolerance and Homosexuality
-John Boswell
Asian Homosexuality
-Wayne R. Dynes, Stephen Donaldson
I am not good with finding information on the web, but I managed to find some stuff:
"Many people feel comfortable crossing gender roles occasionally, and some are simply attracted to the traditional tasks of the opposite sex; this does not necessarily imply that they are confused about either their gender identity or their sexuality. Most accounts of female “berdaches” or “manly-hearted” women fail to recognize this fact in assuming that the warrior women they encountered were cross-gendered lesbians when, in fact, they usually considered themselves to be female-identified heterosexual women (Williams 1986:243). "
http://www.laurenhasten.com/testbuild/academberdlh.htm
I am engaged to a pre-op m2f transsexual, and I know a ton of m2f transsexuals and extremely feminine men. All of the ones I know are 2s or 3s on the kinsey scale, or mostly heterosexual.
well, I guess that some didn’t like what I had to say, so I will try to explain some of my ideas.
You implied that I am an uniformed ignorant and a bigot. Now I said what I believed but I also said that everyone else has the right to their beliefs. I said that I think that homosexuality is wrong. I believe this because I am a christian. And in my christian belief structure, it says that homosexuality is wrong.
But now you could say that Christianity is wrong. That is your right to say that. Granted, I don’t like it, but I am not going to go all out and begrudge you for it. Also, I am not going to write posts that say you are a heathen or an ignorant for saying it either. Also, the term bigot is difined by the webster’s dictionary as follows:
a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
Yes, I might be devoted to my own opinions. But from the sounds of it so are you guys. The thing that makes me not a bigot is the word “intolerantly”. I said in my post that I could never tell someone that there beliefs are wrong because I fall short in my own life of perfection. So unless I was perfect (which I am far from) how can I tell others that they are wrong. I can’t. But unless you lead perfect lives(which I don’t think that you guys do) how can you say I am wrong for something? what I should have said is that I feel the idea of homosexuality is wrong(back to my christian beliefs). But are people wrong for doing it, that is up to the individual person that is doing it to decide. So I follow the teachings of my religion, does that make me an ignorant? So I didn’t appreciate being called an uninformed ignorant or a bigot.
Now, you also implied that I didn’t know jack squat about genetics. I realize that if you say that this is a recessive gene, then yes, it could stay in the gene pool. But explain to me how two homosexuals could pass on their genetic material to the next generation. They can’t. Therefore it is a genetic end. If you can enlighten me otherwise, please answer back. By the way, do you have a degree in genetics?
I thank the people who showed me courtesy in replies. I never attemped to take stabs at individuals nor did I mean to(if you felt that I was, I am sorry). I just ask for the same courtesy.
buck8998, meet His4Ever, Joe_Cool and Jerseydiamond. I’m sure you’ll all get along famously.
Esprix
Let’s see… several things come to mind, the most obvious these days being sperm banks.
On top of that, there is also the fact that many gay men begin by forcing themselves to live as straights, and so marry and start families. Some eventually accept the reality and come out, some don’t.
There are other ways in which a hypothetical agy gene could be passed on, but those two will do so show that it can happen.
Btw, please don’t confuse the word “ignorant” with the word “stupid” - they are not synonyms.
**ig·no·rant - adj.
- Lacking education or knowledge.
- Showing or arising from a lack of education or knowledge: an ignorant mistake.
- Unaware or uninformed.**
*Source: dictionary.com *
good point, I didn’t even think about those to circumstances about genetic passage. Thank you for pointing that out to me.
When I posted my last post, I realized the difference between stupid and ignorant. I see now, why you thought that I didn’t though. I was thinking as being informed as a christian. Not from being informed from your side of the issue.
Thank you for pointing out those things though.
Why would you say that I would get along with those people so well? You don’t know what type of company I keep.
I think you’re confusing me with Esprix
Is a preference for same-sex partners natural or conditioned?
Is a preference for redheads natural or conditioned?
Is a preference for hamburgers natural or conditioned?
Is a preference for SUVs natural or conditioned?
Is a preference for dogs natural or conditioned?
Is a preference for Jeff Foxworthy natural or conditioned?
Is a preference for Pepsi natural or conditioned?
Preferences are preferences.
The only difference is how different societies demonize what certain preferences mean.
buck, listen…
You came in here with an unsupported position that directly contradicts not only the scientific evidence, but the direct experience of all the homosexuals I’ve ever heard express themselves on this subject. You did so without having a single fact to back it up.
Now, mostly, I don’t much mind people doing that sorta thing; it’s part and parcel of learning how to debate well. We all make some mistakes, and hopefully we make most of them starting out. But this subject isn’t just a philosophical debate to me; it’s my life. The ‘it’s a choice’ mentality, however unsupported it may be, is the mantra of the people who are struggling to make sure that the man I love and I remain second-class citizens in our own country. Thus, when someone comes into a thread where that proposition has been refuted time and again, and simply restates that position, it’s frustrating and annoying, and even angering.
One of the elements of the ‘it’s a choice’ mindset is a complete disregard for the importance of the experiences of homosexuals in this matter. If you insist that being gay is a choice, even when millions upon millions of homosexuals, drawing on their own personal experiences as homosexuals, tell you that they had no choice in the matter, then you’re dismissing the importance of their testimony. Why is this acceptable? Do you really think we’re all lying? Do you believe that an attribute of homosexuality is dishonesty? Do you think we’re so low that what we say can never count?
I tell you this: I didn’t have a choice. I never chose to be gay. Given the chance, years ago, I would gladly have chosen to be heterosexual. I tried for years to be just that.
Why is my direct experience with this less important than your uninformed opinion?
No, you spoke of opinion. And I – I hope politely – disagreed with your “right to hold an opinion” that is at odds with the relevant factual or statistical data regarding the subject of the opinion. Certainly you have a right to your beliefs – but let’s talk on that subject.
Well, CJ and I disagree with your premise – because we are Christians too. There are two problems with what you’ve expressed here, and I’m not being smartalecky in drawing them out – what does “homosexuality” mean in the two phrases “…homosexuality is wrong” in that quote? Being gay by orientation? Identifying as gay? Acts of gay sex? Being effeminate? Disagreeing with a preacher who condemns the Sodomites? It’s a serious question – because there’s a really tough issue you need to face behind it. Secondly, there’s no referent to the “it” in the last clause “…it says that homosexuality is wrong.” What’s “it”? Your Christian belief structure? Your church? The Bible? God? The dictionary? The amorphous “it” of “it is raining”? Again, this is not to be nitpicky, but to get your position clear and grasp what it is that you are saying.
Different contexts for “wrong” are the problem here. Nobody is saying that you should not feel that homosexuality is a moral wrong if you so choose – they’re saying that you are mistaken in your facts. Like this: you might feel that the prophecies about ritual in the restored Temple in the Book of Ezekiel are a guide to how Christian worship should be conducted. In saying so, you would be at odds with most Christian churches, but would have a right to your opinion. But if instead you said that Ezekiel is in the New Testament, you’re flat out wrong – not morally but in error on a matter of fact.
When I first came to this board there was a great deal I did not know about how homosexual people think and feel, and how they make moral choices. I considered myself uninformed and ignorant, and learned by listening to what they had to say.
I’ll offer you the following comment on what Christianity has to say about homosexuality to the overwhelming majority of us: if you consider that the prohibitions on having sexual relations with someone else of the same sex in Leviticus apply to a loving and committed relationship rather than to just the gratification of lust, then don’t do it. For those people who identify as “gay” and admit to being attracted to that form of sex, and may disagree with you on the interpretation of those prohibitions, or just plain reject them and Christianity with it, your job is to love them as your neighbor, and show the love of Christ to them by your own behavior. The former is the proper response of a Christian to any “temptation to sin” in his own eyes; the latter is the direct and explicit command of Christ, overtly overriding all other commandments.
Well, remember that genetics is a complex subject. (And no, I don’t have a degree in it.) However, “two homosexuals” might be Homebrew and his ex-wife, who certainly conceived a child and who are both gay. Homosexuality might be one outcome of a gene complex reinforced for other reasons – in a post a few months ago, I suggested that the “male-bonding” gene valuable in the past for bonding men in groups for purposes of hunting food for their tribe, now for working together as a team, etc., might have something to do with the phenomenon. Also, not all genes are “expressed” – make things happen – in all people who carry them. A gay man’s sister may have the same gene, and like him fall in love with a man, have children to whom she passes on the gene. Finally, there is a useful cultural trait in having a reservoir of people who are not tied down by children available to help in emergencies and such.
There have been a rather large number of threads addressing homosexuality and Christianity on this board in the last three years; you might want to conduct a search on the two words in Great Debates with time set to “at any time” and look through the discussions.
One final point, on preview: Consider carefully what Mr Visible says. Your choice on whether to form an opinion based on all the facts, including of course your religious beliefs, is directly related to whether or not he is entitled to keep his job, who makes decisions about his medical care when he’s in the emergency room and unconscious, whether his will is successfully challenged, whether his falling in love is regarded as shameful or not, whether he’ll spend 20 years in jail for making love to his beloved… Will you do unto him as you would have him do unto you if you were in his shoes?