Well, ok, and what evidence do you have to support your opinion? I’d also like to point out, just for the record, that sexuality itself isn’t an action. It may be a motivation. One’s sexuality might lead one to have sexual desire for one person over another, which might lead that person to take actions to woo the object of his or her desire, but a person’s sexuality is a component of his or her personality, and merely knowing someone’s sexuality isn’t enough to determine how that person will act.
Hey, I know how fuel feels though about posting. I came in here and posted, and a couple of people probably thatought that I was trolling. But trust me, I wasn’t.
Mr. Invisible, I know that we do not agree in our points. But when I said that I won’t tell other people that they are wrong. I meant it. You should not have to hide your life style because of fear. This may suprise you, but I am a very open-minded person. My thought on this is to let people live how they choose to live. I will also point out here that I think the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy is wrong. I would not care if I fought beside a homosexual. As long as they didn’t push me into their beliefs and could do their job, I have no problem working with anyone.
I know that most people that read my posts probably just shrugged them off and made no further thought to them. A couple did and made good comments. But then some others just scrutinized some of what I said without looking at the other parts of my post with the same intensity (though, some of what I said wasn’t said very well).
I am not a bigot or a hater of anything. We were all put upon this world for a reason. Who is to say what that reason is? Not I. Nor anyone else. I said the reason, that I thought that homosexuality is wrong is my beliefs. Your beliefs say that it is right. Who is wrong? Who should care?
You say the reason you snap back so quickly is because it is your life. That is right, it is. But try and understand, some of us don’t live through that everyday. I know that I can be a little unsympathetic. I don’t mean to be, but I come off that way. I know that you get angry with people like me, WASP’s who think that they have an answer for everything. I am not trying to give an answer when I post, I am trying to through ideas out( though sometimes it probably doesn’t sound like it). I don’t mind being corrected, in fact, it helps me. Example, people pointed out homosexuals having kids in marriage before coming out openly. I admit, I never though about that. But others, who look at posts that they disagree with, can sometimes right back with nothing that helps us understand by just lambasting us to make us quiver under their almighty words. That doesn’t help people understand.
I know most people will look at this and ignore it, but I hope that some read it. (This is kinda like an apology, because I think that some thought I was just trying to be an ass when I posted)
Just for the record, I’m of the opinion that one reason in God’s plan for the past 25 years being a time when gays could come out and live openly as what they are is to test the Christians and see which ones are willing to obey Christ’s commands, and which ones are Pharisees (in the Gospel sense) with an extended Law to Talmudicize for their own convenience.
mr. visible: i tried to say in the beginning of my previous post many times that i was trying NOT to post a theory, but an idea.
i feel like posting here IS research, but i understand about you telling me to do research on studies, so i will do so. i just figured i would throw out an idea on this board, but i guess people would rather debate facts than just logic when dealing with this type of subject. sorry.
From a quote I’d read several years ago that I don’t remember the source of anymore:
Logic is only valid when the premises you bring to it are valid, and when they’re joined without error. And that necessarily means based on facts. I’m sure you’ve seen the “proof” that “some dogs are some cats” – to point out a basic logical flaw.
Skim back for Esprix’s post, and read the four Ask the Gay Guy threads – there’s a wealth of information on the subject, and links to more, in them. And like ffabris, may I commend you on being willing to learn? 
It’s my OPINION, not a research paper.
>state why your opinion is valid<
O-P-I-N-I-O-N
Why the hell should I have to validate my opinion any more than simply to say it is my opinion? This is a poll, right? We are allowed to have our own opinions aren’t we?
Nope, this is Great Debates, where assertions are debated on the basis of what evidence is present for and against them.
Opinions are quite acceptable on this board, unsupported – but in the forum called “In My Humble Opinion” (and elsewhere, depending on the subject – Cafe Society is for discussion of books, movies, TV shows, music – anything connected with the arts in any way, and consists pretty much of people’s opinions).
Different forums, different modus operandi for them. I thought perhaps you were already aware of this from the main Message Board index page, where the forums are described. Sorry to have castigated you?
But, having done so, would you care to share why you hold that opinion? Obviously, nobody here has all the answers (or the questions would go into General Questions, where questions are asked in the expectation of factual answers ). We’re all willing to learn from each other; you may have an insight others have missed.
Well, what did you think was going to happen here, Fuel? Did you expect the denizens of the board to stop, and with a thoughtful look, stroke their chins a moment and exclaim “Egads! Of course that’s what causes homosexuality! Why didn’t we think of it before? Our problem was that we were too well-informed to think about the answer clearly! It took a mind unpolluted by facts or information on the topic to see the truth! Huzzah for Fuel!”
Why would anyone want to hold an opinion that isn’t based in knowledge? About this subject, or any subject? What’s wrong with simply saying “I don’t know enough about that to hold an opinion?” Why not just ask questions of people who know more on the subject than you do, read articles and papers and books about it, if you want to know more? Why do you think an opinion, unsupported by or even in direct contradition of the available facts on the matter, deserves any respect whatsoever? Why, for the love of Pete, do you need to concoct cockamamie conjectures as to why I like Tab A and not Slot B?
And it’s not just Fuel who does this; this very thread is rife with people whose ignorance of gayness hasn’t stopped them from coming up with surreal ideas of what causes Gary to like Mike. I don’t much like having to tell people that they lack the facts to come to conclusions; for every one that gets convinced that their pet theory may not hold a candle to accumulated data, another three pop up with new bizarre formulations. It’s like a demonic game of Whack-A-Mole. But there’s already enough misinformation about gay people floating around out there; if these assumptions aren’t contested, they may make their way into the canon of human sexual mythology along with ‘masturbation makes you grow hair on your palms’ and ‘gayness is contagious.’
You post on a message board, state a theory, claim that it’s not a theory, base it on a complete lack of knowledge of the subject at hand, and invite people to poke holes in it. Why get upset about the fact that people are responding just as you invited them to do? What the heck did you expect was going to happen?
Indeed, MrV, and we seem to have a run on them lately here at the Dope.
Esprix
MrVisible, Esprix, maybe you should give Fuel a break. Unlike others, I think he is really making an effort to learn. Yes, he may come up with some ideas that are known to be false, but he doesn’t appear to be closed-minded about them. I expect that he is struggling to free himself of the homophobia which surrounds him.
Heck, I had a very hard time accepting myself as gay, so I don’t think it is fair to expect that the average straight person would find it easy to accept the reality of homosexuality either. Many don’t bother to try. Others here, like Polycarp, are the exception, not the rule.
I think that with some patience on our part, Fuel will learn. But if he is pounced on then he may just turn away and remain with negative opinions about gay people in general.
Just MO, for what it’s worth.
If I can remember back to the OP, I have a comment on Fuel’s ideas.
FTR, if it matters, I am a straight male.
The OP asked for logical arguments to dispute the idea that people are born heterosexual and homosexuals are conditioned to be that way.
Even though I am in my mid 40’s, I have quite a number of young friends in their 20’s. Many of these friends went though a stage in their teens when they used drugs excessively or in some cases were excessively sexually promiscuous. Most of these friends while still being quite young have eliminated or moderated their more extreme behaviors.
If I assume that their teenage behaviors were “conditioned” (by peer pressure or home environment possibly), there seems to be quite a strong tendency to moderation of their conditioned behavior as they mature.
Logically, what I conclude is this. If everyone is born as a heterosexual, why do so few gays and lesbians likewise tend over time towards their inborn predilection for attractions to the opposite sex and societal norms? Other “conditioned” behaviors don’t seem to be so resistant to change. This suggests to me that homosexuality is more than a conditioned behavior.
I appreciate the compliment, but it’s not deserved – I’d say a high proportion of the regulars on this board would describe themselves as “straight but not narrow” – all it takes is the moral integrity to refrain from trying to run other people’s lives, against the all-too-human tendency to do so.
i don’t think you guys realized what i was doing when i posted my last proposition. i wanted you guys to analyze the statements. this was how i decided to start my research, with logic. logic is not as hampered as you guys think it is. making a sound logical statement means something, however much that is.
i understand all your statements up to this point and they are noted, but could you humor me for a minute and analyze that last post?
this is the post i am talking about, un edited.
“Logic” does not equate to “any idea that pops into your head.” Logic is based on reason and knowledge, and while you may think your ideas/theories had some logic in them, without the underlying knowledge of genetics, homosexuality and human psychology, you made large, inappropriate leaps that, in retrospect, were quite illogical.
It’s not that we didn’t understand you, it’s that you didn’t make any sense. (How oxymoronic is that?)
Esprix
Fuel, until now, I have been sticking up for you. However, by reiterating your earlier post, it is starting to appear that you are not really reading what others have been telling you, that you have not been giving much weight to posts made by gay people here in this thread.
I am one of those (few?) who sees himself as a 6 on the Kinsey scale: I have no attraction whatsoever for women, other than intellectually (I have some wonderful female friends, and I have great fun discussing men with them ;)). I have never had sex with a woman, and frankly, the very thought of it is, well, let’s say it’s disturbing to me.
And it has been this way for as long as I can remember. I have never been drawn to women in the way straight men are. Admittedly, I tried to pretend I was, to force myself to look at women in an appreciative way, but it was self-deceipt.
How does that factor into your “theory”?
Polycarp, I did not intend to single you out as the only open-minded straight on the board. But the Dopers are, I think, not representative of the population as a whole; in general, they are more open minded and more willing to learn than most. But to me, you have always stood out, and I enjoy reading your posts.
esprix, now that you made such a strong statement, i must require of you to give one example of faulty logic in my post above. i don’t necessarily believe my statement is error free, but you can’t get off making a statement like that without citing examples, just because we are talking over the internet… show some respect.
example, and reason it is illogical. i am waiting.
and keep in mind, your side of the debate has as much solid proof as my side does… zero. in the complete absence of medical proof for your side or the other side, i have resorted to a human psychology and logic study. this is not a sin.
A spectrum of a man? What in the world does that mean?
You’re assuming here that sex addict is a point on the spectrum of normal human sexuality. If you assume a scale of homo/heterosexuality, then the range runs from homosexual to heterosexual. If you want a scale of sexual addiction, or intensity of sexual attraction, you need an entirely separate scale.
So, we’re all born bisexual? Or some of us are born gay, and some straight? Or all of us are born straight? The closest thing that I can find to a reasonable interpretation of this statement is that we’re all born with a healthy sex drive, whether it be homo- or hetero-sexual.
So, we’re born with an orientation, and then it can change. Is that it? Someone who is born homosexual could, when awareness of their sexuality begins, have turned heterosexual without even being aware that they were homosexual to start with?
Okay. So Male Human A is born, and he’s got a genetic predisposition to be a happy homosexual, as long as he’s not too sheepish. Then, he makes some decisions, which turn him straight. But he’s not happy, because he’s not what he should be; a non-sheepish homosexual.
But… but you said… that we are born with a predisposition… right here, you said it… “we all are born somewhere in the middle of these two healthy inner points.” So are all bisexuals happy? Because they can’t be thrown off course from being bisexual? Or are they all miserable because they can’t find the point on the spectrum they should be occupying?
The Kinsey scale doesn’t address the issue of change in sexual orientation; it simply provides a broad scale on which people can locate themselves based on their sexual experiences and thoughts.
Here are my recommendations:
-
Do research on how to do research. Research the following topics: the scientific method, dedcutive reasoning, inductive reasoning, and logic.
-
Work on your writing skills. You show promise, but you lack the ability to communicate effectively as of yet. Try reading what you write aloud, to see how it sounds. Watch your sentence structure particularly; it’s often difficult to make out what you’re talking about.
-
Research your subject before posting about it.
What you posted was a theory, however ill-supported. A theory is the base upon which an argument is built; it’s the first step in deductive reasoning. But theories aren’t worth beans, and incomprehensible self-contradicting theories are worth even less.
The reason that people haven’t been arguing about your theories, and instead have been urging you to do some research on the subject, is that you make no sense whatsoever. There may be a germ of an idea hidden somewhere behind your convoluted prose, but it’s beyond the abilities of mortal men to dig it out of there.
If you don’t express yourself clearly, don’t be surprised if nobody understands you.
I was just about to post, and in preview, saw MrVisible’s reply, so backed out. His post is far better than what I was going to say.
Well, I’d say MrV said much of what needed to say. It’s not that you’re not making sense (to yourself if no one else) if your ideas were acceptable to have come out of thin air, it’s that your premises are all flawed because you didn’t bother to do the research on those premises. Theories are not made out of whole cloth - they are based on current evidence to date. Your ideas weren’t based on any current psychological or medical evidence; rather, they were made up of what “sounded logical” to you. There’s your flaw.
Esprix