The Homosexuality Discussion Thread

[TheDrummingKING]

The beach is full of them, and kids too.

Okay maybe then it's more about the way they act when half naked.

I've never seen full nudity on a gay pride day. Never. And we have them for a while now. And I've seen a lot of kids with their parents watching the parades.

I saw two pictures of naked men at a Vancouver gay pride event while only searching "gay pride", add in the word naked and prepare for penises.

--------------------------------------------------​

I'd imagine (admittedly I'm speaking out of ignorance here, as I haven't attended a gay pride event) that they're using being half naked as a way to flaunt their genitals more so than their sexuality (as I really don't see the connection between showing your body and being gay, or at least any more so than being straight). I can understand the flaunting their sexuality though in the sense that it's something that heterosexual people do in almost every day in one way or another, but it's apparently bad for gays to. But to me it really doesn't seem like the way they go about. I feel like the costumes and what not are a rather extreme way to say "I'm gay" and that they (probably) only further the belief that if you're gay then you're "weird".

I still think that dressing in everyday clothes and having signs saying something along the lines of "can you tell which ones of us are gay?" would better get the point across that sexual preference doesn't matter and doesn't make you any different from anyone else, then having massively flamboyant floats, etc.. Maybe I'm missing the point of the parades.

 

[niky]

I mean, its almost forced upon people these days to accept homosexuality, even if they aren't homophobic, causing discomfort.

Try becoming a parent, then you start seeing how much tongue-on-tongue, hot and sweaty heterosexual action goes on the television... on billboards... on posters. The streets and screens of any major city are dripping in sex.

Everybody nowadays is forced to confront SEX. Whether they're prudish or not. Causing discomfort.

 

[NissanSkylineN1]

The DrummingKing's picture

I don't know why, but that reminds me of Daron Malakian:

Try becoming a parent, then you start seeing how much tongue-on-tongue, hot and sweaty heterosexual action goes on the television... on billboards... on posters. The streets and screens of any major city are dripping in sex.

Cover their eyes? Scold them for looking at sexual innuendos/advertisements? That's what my parents used to do.

 

[niky]

Cover their eyes? Scold them for looking at sexual innuendos/advertisements? That's what my parents used to do.

Guidance is better than simply declaring something taboo.

Why make a child feel guilty for something they can't understand? You're attaching negative connotations to an act that is not only natural, but which is responsible for creating that child in the first place.

By simply ignoring that which makes us uncomfortable and teaching our kids that they're taboo, you're simply creating a huge area of life wherein your children have no useful knowledge.

It's always the closeted ones who get pregnant right out of high school. No experience and not even the inkling as to what a condom is and what it's used for.

 

[Northstar]

gay people don't have thousands of years of oppressing straight people.

Statements like this annoy the crap out of me, I have been on this planet for 24 years, none of which have been spent oppressing anyone. Why should I have to take the blame for what people that came before me have done?

Sure straight people haven't had it as rough over the years, don't see how that makes it not ok for me to be to be proud of the fact I'm straight.

As for the parades, other than closing down roads I have no problem with them.

 

[NissanSkylineN1]

It's always the closeted ones who get pregnant right out of high school. No experience and not even the inkling as to what a condom is and what it's used for.

They learn in school and through friends.

 

[Azuremen]

They learn in school and through friends.

No they really don't The amount young people think they know versus what they actually know is pretty dumbfounding.

Also, you never addressed my earlier post directed at you, take a look back a bit.

 

[niky]

They learn in school and through friends.

So, the best place to learn about sex is from other kids who are just as ignorant?

That's a brilliant idea. Almost as good as taking driving lessons from other ten year old kids.

Even better. When you have an accident because you never learned how to drive, you get broken bones. When you have an accident because you never learned about safe sex, you get a baby. Babies trump broken bones every time.

 

[Joel]

If by pride you mean self-respect for being themselves, sure. But then every adolescent should be able to and few do. I just had an idea! Nerd Pride events! I can see it now, a giant baking soda volcano float, young people in lab coats holding flasks boiling over with dry ice gas, model rockets launching, cosplaying astronauts, parade balloons of the planets (with Pluto coming up 500 feet behind the parade), and a massive Tesla coil powering it all.

For what it's worth I'd totally go to this event. I do understand what you're getting at here, but I think in this case it's different. People stop taking your lunch money in adult life, but for openly gay adults it's still not exactly the friendliest environment.

If you mean the high or inordinate opinion of one's own dignity, importance, merit, or superiority, that should be earned. Otherwise it is just bordering on narcissism, which isn't uncommon in many young people in these days of instant gratification.

I agree with you, the whole unique snowflake everyone's special thing has gotten a bit silly. That being said, I don't really think pride in one's sexuality is predicated by life experiences. I don't really know how you can "earn" pride in your sexuality. I do agree with the general sentiment, just not in this specific case. Gay pride events are about being in an environment of receptive people, where it's ok to do things that would otherwise be taboo. I don't really see it as narcissistic, more just that being gay is nothing to be ashamed of, which I agree that every adolescent should be able to do. I also agree that it could be more child friendly. It can't be entirely reserved though, it has to be a bit more extroverted of an event because of the still active anti-gay sentiment.

Statements like this annoy the crap out of me, I have been on this planet for 24 years, none of which have been spent oppressing anyone. Why should I have to take the blame for what people that came before me have done?

Sure straight people haven't had it as rough over the years, don't see how that makes it not ok for me to be to be proud of the fact I'm straight.

As for the parades, other than closing down roads I have no problem with them.

I'm not saying you should be feeling straight guilt or anything ridiculous like that. What I mean is that these "straight pride" things usually come out after gay people have the gall to ask for something to not be discriminatory. You should not be taking blame for what happened to gay people in the past, nor should you have to hide or not be proud of your sexuality and who you are, I didn't for a second say that. If straight pride events were just about being proud of your sexuality it's a different thing, but straight pride usually arises as a counter to gay pride, as if it's a war between the two sexualities or something. That's the difference, gay pride rallies come from the discrimination against gays which is starting to get better. People aren't discriminated against for being straight.

 

[NissanSkylineN1]

Also, you never addressed my earlier post directed at you, take a look back a bit.

There was nothing really to address about it...you doubting the validity of your own point?

So, the best place to learn about sex is from other kids who are just as ignorant?

Well, there's sex-ed at school, and if a child is hanging out with someone who is that ignorant to be breaking common sense, he really is hanging out with the wrong crowd. Its not like they're closeted throughout their childhood, only before puberty.

 

[Azuremen]

There was nothing really to address about it...you doubting the validity of your own point?

So then you agree? I am not doubting the point I made at all, but I did tailor to prompt you think a bit more about how issues have to pushed into the public light fairly heavily at times.

Well, there's sex-ed at school, and if a child is hanging out with someone who is that ignorant to be breaking common sense, he really is hanging out with the wrong crowd. Its not like they're closeted throughout their childhood, only before puberty.

Sex-ed at school is laughable.

The rest of your statement is built on so many assumptions I'm just going blink and ask you to better explain yourself.

 

[Northstar]

I didn't for a second say that.

Sorry, it was more of a general response to those types of statements rather than directly at you.

 

[Joel]

Sorry, it was more of a general response to those types of statements rather than directly at you.

No worries, for what it's worth my statement was overly general too.

 

[NissanSkylineN1]

So then you agree? I am not doubting the point I made at all, but I did tailor to prompt you think a bit more about how issues have to pushed into the public light fairly heavily at times.

Yeah, I agree that issues need to be pushed for everyone to get rid of stereotypes and biases. However, you shouldn't push too hard to tick everyone off.

Sex-ed at school is laughable.

The rest of your statement is built on so many assumptions I'm just going blink and ask you to better explain yourself.

I don't know about where you live, but sex-ed here is informative in terms of safe sex.

Here is what the education system does:

Grade 1 - Ontario's government is currently thinking about placing sexual education at this grade.

Grade 5 - They tell you that there is a penis and a vagina. They show you a movie on how it works and you get to ask questions

Grade 6-8 - They start teaching in detail about puberty and what a condom is and how you put it on. They also teach you about types of sex.

Grade 9 - Teach you more in-depth about sex and safe sex. They teach you about sexting and detailed diagrams of reporductive parts. They also teach about preventative measures such as birth control, morning after pills etc. STDs are also taught in depth.


Children nowadays use the power of Google to learn more too. They can also talk amongst friends and peers of the opposite sex.

 

[Conza]

This was posted in a different thread, in response to a suggestion that there may be a genetic predisposition towards homosexuality in some people:

I'd like to continue this discussion here. What are your thoughts about the causes of homosexuality? About the consequences of homosexuality?

Wow amazing op, I'm not out to attack it or the member, it's a genuine artefact... But what? This was only published in 2003? If I'm attacking anything, it's that its continued existence is a reality.

I've resisted posting in this thread for a while, but somehow it keeps coming up as a thread someone's 'just' posted in, which is amazing really.

I think firstly people should identify, that regardless of whether or not your religion defines some of/all of the practices of a homosexual female or male couple, as a sin, science has shown in animals other than the Homo sapien (that's us, humans), homosexuality occurs there as well. This isn't even really anything, that should be a point of debate, it's natural, let's move on.

Choice/Born with it, I'm leaning toward 'born with it', however that doesn't fully explain bi-sexuals, my only answer for that would be, they do both, they are born straight but choose to have relations with the same gender as well, or vice-versa.

In terms of my personal beliefs, I've never been religious, but I was once all for the protection of marriage between a man and woman, I'd previously say things like 'fine, let them do what they want, but just don't call it marriage' this was when I was 16/17, and for the life of me now, more than half a decade later, I can't fathom why I thought that.

Simply put - who cares? We're denying a portion of our society, no matter how small they are 10%, 5%, even if it were less than 0.001%, we're denying them the same legal rights that the majority of us have enjoyed for centuries, and it doesn't make sense.

I do so many things that are likely considered a sin by many religions, I ate a non-kosher meal today, I've given blood, I campaign for abortion, but because I'm in the majority as a heterosexual, my other infractions are over looked? In the reverse, why isn't this one ignored/overlooked by members of religious and social groups that don't like it?

Why? What better does it make your or my lives, if we actively participate in removing their rights to feel free, to marry, to do whatever? Our rights remain at x, and theirs go down, so... relatively are we going up? No, of course we're not going up, they go down (or stay down), we remain the same.

That's why I find it so strange when threads like this exist, forget the purely ancient poll choices, the least 1950s one being along the lines of 'let the gays judge themselves', there are only a few relevant poll questions here.

Q1. Does allowing the freedom of homosexual people to be diminished, improve upon the freedoms of the heterosexual population?

A1. Y/N. I can't for the life of me understand why any sane person would answer yes... if you 'haven't' been declared "insane" and would answer yes, and would give me your thoughts, that might be interesting.

Q2. Pretending that it did, do we have the right to elevate majority groups, at the cost of lowering minority groups?

A2. Y/N. Again, in what universe a sane person would believe that this is ok, is I hope so far removed from this one, that I can barely imagine it.

Q3. Given that homosexuality has been proven in science in multiple Earth animals, and that religious and social groups focus on this issue more than the others, do you think it's time they move on, give up, and find something possibly productive to do with their time, for example, aiding world hunger and poverty?

A3. Y/N. To think for a moment, that answering "No, condemning homosexuality is more important" than curing real problems in the world, is utterly absurd, I'm sure you could find a psychiatrist that wouldn't declare you insane, perhaps on all three of my questions, answering differently than I have, but I would struggle to believe he wasn't a member of one of these groups, or at the very least, being paid by them.

 

[niky]

Well, there's sex-ed at school, and if a child is hanging out with someone who is that ignorant to be breaking common sense, he really is hanging out with the wrong crowd. Its not like they're closeted throughout their childhood, only before puberty.

I'm perfectly aware that there's Sex Ed in school. Would you like to know what I minored in in College?

Health Education

As Azuremen notes, Sex Ed is laughable. Because Sex Ed must appeal to the lowest common denominator and appease the mores and taboos of various cultures, it's limited almost chokingly to the theoretical and scientific.

It's like learning how to rebuild a car engine without ever looking at one in real life.

In the end, parents have to take an active role in explaining to kids the dangers of unsafe sex, the distortions, half-truths, lies and whole truths in the media about sex, and why kids should wait.

Children nowadays use the power of Google to learn more too. They can also talk amongst friends and peers of the opposite sex.

If you leave the education to school and classmates (and whatever crowd you run with, it WILL be the wrong crowd... because none of you really know anything about sex), then you're in a whole heap of trouble.

It's like allowing a bunch of teenagers to learn about turbocharging by building their own turbo kit... without the help of an actual mechanic or tuner. They're going to break a lot of things and do a lot of things wrong before they get it right.

 

[Joel]

I'm perfectly aware that there's Sex Ed in school. Would you like to know what I minored in in College?

Health Education

As Azuremen notes, Sex Ed is laughable. Because Sex Ed must appeal to the lowest common denominator and appease the mores and taboos of various cultures, it's limited almost chokingly to the theoretical and scientific.

I also find it very teacher dependent. I went to Catholic school which was a whole different animal, but it depended on the teacher. My grade 8 teacher did her best to explain everything as well as she could and gave us the straight facts with no BS, but my high school sex ed left a lot to be desired. Teachers in high school were really really bad. It was abstinence only education. For me the gaps were filled in by talking to my parents as my mom works at the health unit, and by educating myself from better sources than a Catholic school teacher.

 

[NissanSkylineN1]

^^So you're saying that the first time someone has sex should be under supervision?

 

[Azuremen]

^^So you're saying that the first time someone has sex should be under supervision?

This is the icing on a long list of rather naive statements you've made thus far. I'm honestly questioning if you've ever had sex now.

There isn't some guide book for sex and everyone has their own take on it, and that is why you kind of need a mentor that is willing to discuss a bit of it with you. If I went by sex education at any level, in any area, I'd probably find sex deathly boring. And sure, they try to teach you about STD's and such, but most people don't pay much attention in those classes and juvenile attitudes certainly don't help. Combine that with a bit of naiveness and various social stigmas and taboos, and you have a bunch of kids that have seen some awkward diagrams of this and that, and perhaps have seen some porn (which is rarely like actual sex).

That you sit here and try to draw these lines in imaginary sand about how there isn't a need to actually educate people about sex in a more personalized manner (I don't mean first hand) because "sex-ed" is sufficient is mind blowing. I have a feeling your upbringing (iirc is Muslim) may have something to do with your seemingly naive attitude on the topic, as is generally the case with relatively conservative types. The fact you didn't really get why "Straight Pride" day is basically every day is also telling.

 

[NissanSkylineN1]

I'm not saying there isn't a need for personalized sexual education. I'm just trying to say that the sexual education at school isn't that bad as you guys make it seem. Obviously if there was a chance for everyone to have personalized discussions regarding sex, I wouldn't object at all, and that there is always room for improvement in the governmental education system.

Yes, kids will be bored, but if they aren't interested and not wanting to learn something as important as sex-ed, don't you think they kinda deserve any consequences that they will face in the future as a result of it?

Both parents and teachers should try their best to inform young adults and teens about sex, but in the end, there's no substitution of first-hand experience. And that only comes with actually doing it.

I'll admit it, the rather conservative mindset that I have been raised does have its ups and downs, but regardless of one's mindset, facts cannot be altered and the only way for one to fully understand a topic is to be as knowledgeable about something as possible.

In terms of the "Straight Pride" day thing, we don't go around making parades about our sexuality everyday, do we?

 

[Azuremen]

I'm not saying there isn't a need for personalized sexual education. I'm just trying to say that the sexual education at school isn't that bad as you guys make it seem. Obviously if there was a chance for everyone to have personalized discussions regarding sex, I wouldn't object at all, and that there is always room for improvement in the governmental education system.

Not it really is as bad as we are making it out to be, the fact you don't understand this just indicates your lack of experience.

Yes, kids will be bored, but if they aren't interested and not wanting to learn something as important as sex-ed, don't you think they kinda deserve any consequences that they will face in the future as a result of it?

You mean being supported by your tax dollars courtesy of the Canadian government for the medical costs they will incur?

Sounds lovely to me.

In terms of the "Straight Pride" day thing, we don't go around making parades about our sexuality everyday, do we?

If you had actually read anything on the last two pages, you'd realize straight sexuality is basically everywhere, and on everything. Most advertisements play on it, especially in car culture and anything "man" like, its on TV, in sitcoms, in jokes. You don't realize this because you are so use to seeing it already that you don't even question it. An easy example would be a jewelry ad, especially for engagement rings, almost all portray a straight couple. If a gay couple is used, people will make a fuss over it as forcing gay culture upon them.

I'll admit it, the rather conservative mindset that I have been raised does have its ups and downs, but regardless of one's mindset, facts cannot be altered and the only way for one to fully understand a topic is to be as knowledgeable about something as possible.

At the moment, you seem rather bent on not understanding the topic at all and just repeating yourself.

And please describe the ups of a conservative upbringing, because all I generally see with it is indoctrination of prejudice and ignorance.

 

[Joel]

Yes, kids will be bored, but if they aren't interested and not wanting to learn something as important as sex-ed, don't you think they kinda deserve any consequences that they will face in the future as a result of it?

We're (teenagers) all horny buggers and sex is the most primal instinct there is. Sure everyone's accountable for their actions but to just say it's their fault is not acceptable, we're talking about people who aren't trusted to vote or often drive cars. You can say that they shouldn't be having sex but that's just ignoring human nature and sticking your head in the sand. Saying they deserve it is not the right mindset to have if we want to be reducing STD's and teen pregnancies, etc etc.

In terms of the "Straight Pride" day thing, we don't go around making parades about our sexuality everyday, do we?

No we don't, but we go around parading it everywhere regardless. Heterosexual displays are so omnipresent that you don't even recognize them as displays of heterosexuality, you just see them as "normal". The example about engagement rings is a perfect example.

 

[arora]

 

[NissanSkylineN1]

You mean being supported by your tax dollars courtesy of the Canadian government for the medical costs they will incur?

Sounds lovely to me.

Oh.

And please describe the ups of a conservative upbringing, because all I generally see with it is indoctrination of prejudice and ignorance.

Although it is ignorant, it tends to keep some things simple, regardless of facts. (Which I will admit, it is morally wrong)

At the moment, you seem rather bent on not understanding the topic at all and just repeating yourself.

I do understand it, I'm just not trying to seem too opinionated (which hasn't worked clearly).

 

[Johnnypenso]

No we don't, but we go around parading it everywhere regardless. Heterosexual displays are so omnipresent that you don't even recognize them as displays of heterosexuality, you just see them as "normal". The example about engagement rings is a perfect example.

Given that 90- 95+% of the target audience of an engagement ring is heterosexual in places where same sex marriage is legal, it makes perfect sense that you would target your advertising to 90- 95+% of your audience. If you're advertsing in predominantly gay media of some kind, obviously you'll tailor your ads towards that target market.

Not everything is a heterosexual conspiracy. Just because Tim Tebow isn't doing Revlon nail polish commercials doesn't mean Revlon is purposely discriminating against men.

 

[Joel]

Given that 90- 95+% of the target audience of an engagement ring is heterosexual in places where same sex marriage is legal, it makes perfect sense that you would target your advertising to 90- 95+% of your audience. If you're advertsing in predominantly gay media of some kind, obviously you'll tailor your ads towards that target market.

It's one example. The point isn't that it's a conspiracy keeping gay marriage out of public light, the point is that things like that are a public display of heterosexual behaviour and "glorifying" it. I'm not saying that we need to start having commercials with gay people proposing to each other, but if there was one it would be "controversial". It's more about how overt displays of heterosexuality are seen as normal and outwardly gay displays are controversial or edgy.

Just because Tim Tebow isn't doing Revlon nail polish commercials doesn't mean Revlon is purposely discriminating against men.

the mental image I got here is absolutely hilarious

 

[Azuremen]

Oh.

What a clear response. Did that not strike you when you thought they'd reap what they sowed?

Although it is ignorant, it tends to keep some things simple, regardless of facts. (Which I will admit, it is morally wrong)

And yet it seems you almost revel in this, despite seeing the faults in it. Not to mention the things it keeps simple often explode dramatically when someone in the family questions the conservative views. Which I see happen fairly often in religious families when their kids don't agree on the typically homophobic attitudes their parents hold.

I do understand it, I'm just not trying to seem too opinionated (which hasn't worked clearly).

Likely because your opinions have been put forth in a fairly "matter of fact" way despite being out of sync with reality.

Given that 90- 95+% of the target audience of an engagement ring is heterosexual in places where same sex marriage is legal, it makes perfect sense that you would target your advertising to 90- 95+% of your audience. If you're advertsing in predominantly gay media of some kind, obviously you'll tailor your ads towards that target market.

 

[homeforsummer]

I just had an idea! Nerd Pride events! I can see it now, a giant baking soda volcano float, young people in lab coats holding flasks boiling over with dry ice gas, model rockets launching, cosplaying astronauts, parade balloons of the planets (with Pluto coming up 500 feet behind the parade), and a massive Tesla coil powering it all.

I'd totally go to that.

Statements like this annoy the crap out of me, I have been on this planet for 24 years, none of which have been spent oppressing anyone. Why should I have to take the blame for what people that came before me have done?

Sure straight people haven't had it as rough over the years, don't see how that makes it not ok for me to be to be proud of the fact I'm straight.

I don't think anyone is suggesting you should either take the blame or not be proud of being straight.

Though being proud of being straight I find an odd concept. I like being heterosexual, because I like the opposite sex. I don't need to feel proud of it, no more than I'm proud of liking videogames or cars, and expressing that fondness for each by being in relationships/playing videogames/driving cars.

The pride aspect for LGBT types comes from the unity in trying to fight for rights already enjoyed by everyone else. As a young-ish, straight, white, middle-class male, I'm one of the least disadvantaged denominations it's possible to be. I shouldn't feel ashamed to be any of those things, but "pride" seems like an odd way of categorising my emotions for all that too.

If I was an older, homosexual, black, working-class woman, my life might have been a little more complicated so I'd be inclined to feel proud for joining others in similar situations to try and obtain equal rights. Myself, I'd rather support that cause too, for exactly the reasons anyone should support equal rights.

 

[Danny]

I don't need to feel proud of it, no more than I'm proud of liking videogames or cars, and expressing that fondness for each by being in relationships/playing videogames/driving cars.

You made a conscious decision to be heterosexual, and you should celebrate it.

 

[homeforsummer]

You made a conscious decision to be heterosexual, and you should celebrate it.

Quite. That's what some may have you believe.