Being gay isn't a choice

Author: drlebronski ,

Posts

Total: 60
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 71
Posts: 3,568
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
--> @zedvictor4
There's already 7.9 billion people clogging up this planet
Not sure what this has to do with the topic, but, whatever. I don't agree that 7.9B is too many people. We don't have a people population problem; we have a resources distribution problem, coupled with greed.
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 3,302
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
--> @zedvictor4
Wrong in every regard, again, you lack of correct information regarding sexuality and gender astounds me. The biological impulses are indeed noncontrollable, you can claim otherwise, but the data doesn't support your claim. Furthermore, it is also true that environment does have a role to play when it comes to the development of sexuality, do any of the steps require choice? No. 

That would be actually forming relationships, that requires choice, everything before that is an impulse subconsiously constructed by our brain - the opposite of a "choice". Its like saying you "choose" to favor one flavor of ice cream over another, in other words - bullshit. 
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 4,895
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
@Theweakeredge

A hot headed answer and wrong in every regard. Your information regarding sexuality might be spot on PC, but the PC agenda seeks to overlook the reality of the issue in order to justify an action...... And as far as I am concerned an action that doesn't need justifying.

If you read my response dispassionately you would see that I was agreeing  that "biological impulses are noncontrollable".....FLRW was  stating the obvious.

Though the question was about choice and not about brain function per se, and choice is about making a conscious decision, and conscious decisions by definition are controllable.

Fundamentally, the noncontrollable impulse is telling the organism to procreate, and procreational sex has but one natural modus operandi.

Therefore to adopt any other course of action is to choose not to procreate, but to choose between a wide variety of other recreational options.

The outcome of any action will nonetheless be the same....Temporary satisfaction of the urge to reproduce.

What else might affect one's impulses and consequent choices, is not relevant to the question.

Overriding natural impulses and indulging in "Gay" recreational sex, although seemingly preferential is still undeniably a choice. Other options are available.


All that said....What ever method of recreational sex you might might find preferential and therefore choose to adopt is absolutely fine by me, and does not require PC justification.

Just as your childish choice to block me, is absolutely fine too.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 4,895
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
--> @fauxlaw
True.

If we ever get to such a point, "too many people" would  be defined by unsustainability.


Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 64
Posts: 2,172
4
7
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
4
7
11
"Gay" is gene-determined and isn't "a choice".
 "Being" is a choice as you can just shoot yourself and stab your heart at any given moment. You choose to live. When you come to live, you are determined to be either gay or not gay, and there is nothing changing the true identity of gay/straight/bi/etc.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 4,895
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
--> @Intelligence_06
"Gay" is an established social construct, relative to a specific recreational sex methodology.

There is no such thing as a "Gay gene" per se....Maybe a genetic coding that might affect a conscious choice to perform a particular recreational sex act.

Though there is certainly a whole lot of social nurturing going on too....If you make a sex act socially acceptable then more people will give it a go and probably enjoy the experience.....After all, enjoyment is the secondary purpose of recreational sex.


Nonetheless.

If I chose to only have recreational sex with sheep, would I therefore be able to justify my actions  by  saying that I  possessed a Baaaa gene, and had no choice?

And just to make Theweakerone's hair curl......Why do we not attribute paedophiles with a Kiddy gene?.....Perhaps they have no choice either.

If you're going to be absolutely PC non-discriminatory, then it's got to be SLGBTPQ.

Why just a "Gay gene"?

In fact, can any choice action that seemingly strays from a social norm be justified by a no choice gene?
drlebronski
drlebronski's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 386
2
4
8
drlebronski's avatar
drlebronski
2
4
8
In reality if being gay WAS a choice it would not matter at all.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 4,895
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
--> @drlebronski
As far as we are able to know, everything is real.

And realistically, being "gay" doesn't matter, to anything other than thinking people. Which is why we have these discussions.

Though realistically, and notwithstanding physiological anomalies, humans are only humans, that can typically and realistically only be sub-categorized into male and female procreational bodies.

Whereas "gay" is a social construct relative to a male recreational sex methodology.
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 64
Posts: 2,172
4
7
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
4
7
11
--> @zedvictor4
Theweakeredge, I believe, should have cited something that stated that one's sexuality directly correlates to the state of several genes found in the human DNA. Those genes determines if you are truly gay or not. As a human, being gay technically isn't a choice.

In the end, being gay is a choice. You can't choose to just be gay or something, but you can always cease to exist(not recommended), in which then you will be neither gay nor straight, neither tall nor short, neither overweight nor skinny, neither intelligent nor stupid. You don't exist.


zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 4,895
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
--> @Intelligence_06
Everything physiological correlates to the state of genes.

Though "Gay" is a social construct that correlates to human data management.


Controversial question:
Therefore, does the paedophile also possess a sexuality that correlates directly to the state of genes?




Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 64
Posts: 2,172
4
7
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
4
7
11
--> @zedvictor4
Paedophilia is a mental disorder, however you can choose to not harass minors. 

That said, being gay or straight are essentially the same as mental disorders, except that it isn't damaging to either the self nor the outside world. Being gay is mental, but not disorder. Mental states can be hinted by a gene or several genes, and the state of several genes may put someone in depression without abuse because genes said so.

I believe genes may lead to someone being more likely to be a pedophile, though the law enforcement tries to prevent that for the bigger picture.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 4,895
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
--> @Intelligence_06
That's all conveniently subjective though.

When does a disorder not correlate to genes.

Harassment is only relative to  social behaviour. 

And "Gays" can choose not to participate in homosexual acts.

Dispassionately, there is no special distinction to be made between G and P.....The only difference is how they relate to currently accepted social behaviour.
ronjs
ronjs's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 265
0
2
2
ronjs's avatar
ronjs
0
2
2
--> @Reece101
I am 100% heterosexual, and I know one of my granddaughters boyfriends wanted to try homosexuality, so in his case he chose to homosexual at least temporarily. 
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 791
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
--> @ronjs
Picturing your family gossip puts a smile on my face.
But anyway it sounds like what you’re talking about is experimentation.
Knowing one’s own sexuality can be confusing especially when you’re young. 

Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 64
Posts: 2,172
4
7
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
4
7
11
--> @zedvictor4
Genes determine if you are likely to find people in the same sex attractive or not.

So, in some cases, you are gay before you know it.

However, you can always choose not to act gay and choose to act gay. The decoder man chose the later and got punished.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 4,895
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
--> @Reece101
Notwithstanding physiological anomalies. There's nothing whatsoever confusing about the difference between a penis and a vagina.

Nor is there anything confusing about their intended purpose.

Mixed social messages relating to procreational urges and associated recreational sex is where the confusion arises.

As a species we have developed a social tendency, to overlook and misinterpret the intended purpose of our sex organs.

Penis in vagina = procreation.

Penis up another blokes backside = recreation.

Simple.

Living together, acquiring a mortgage and a nice new fitted kitchen, and then settling down with a new puppy = Social construct.

Experiment and choose.

Nonetheless. 7.9 billion and counting, so a lot of people are still getting the hang of it.
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 791
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
--> @zedvictor4

I was talking about sexual orientation (who you’re attracted to), not biological sex. Anyway, having a penis or vagina aren’t always great indicators of how one should feel, especially if you were born with DSD, specifically CHA, and doctors did the wrong surgery. I think you would agree with that.

Nonetheless I’ll give you some arguments to see where you land. 

  1.  It’s a fact homosexual behaviour and gender fluidity are well documented in mammals other than us. Is it really correct to state “mixed social messages relating to procreational urges and associated recreational sex is where the confusion arises.” And also “As a species we have developed a social tendency to overlook and misinterpret the intended purpose of our sex organs.” Or are you off the mark and there’s a much more deeper understanding to be had?
  2. Both transgenderism and homosexuality are not modern phenomena. They go back thousands of years in a wide range of ancient societies. 

zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 4,895
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
--> @Reece101
No Idea what CHA might be, as I could find no immediate contextual reference to it.

Nonetheless as ever I did state "Notwithstanding physiological anomalies".

And as I previously stated also, attraction relative to recreational sex may be genetically influenced, but is also certainly socially influenced and maybe also environmentally influenced.

Though the distinction I make, lies between procreation and recreation. Homosexual sex is a recreational derivative of the procreational drive, as are the many other methods of achieving sexual satisfaction. Choices Choices Choices.

And as I keep stressing "gay" as in relationship choices,  is a social construct and nothing whatsoever to do with genetics.

As for animals......My dog is happy to hump my leg, and my tortoise goes a bundle on my work boots......So is this special genetics or just the urge to procreate in the absence of an appropriate mate?

As for history...Nature has always thrown up developmental obscurities. That's stating the obvious....And homosexual sex has long since been a method of achieving orgasm.

So why do such protagonists have to keep writing so much into the justification of the obvious....Because historically, and (contrary to popular thinking) also currently, homosexual sex is a social taboo. 


Urgency...Sex act...Orgasm...Temporary satisfaction achieved...Roll over and go to sleep....And repeat.....Same old, same old.
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 791
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
--> @zedvictor4
No Idea what CHA might be, as I could find no immediate contextual reference to it.
I meant CAH (congenital adrenal hyperplasia) 
Essentially it’s a congenital condition where it’s unclear if a newborn is male or female. 
A doctor essentially has to do surgery not always clear on the biological sex. 

Nonetheless as ever I did state "Notwithstanding physiological anomalies".
That isn’t about a physiological anomaly. 

And as I previously stated also, attraction relative to recreational sex may be genetically influenced, but is also certainly socially influenced and maybe also environmentally influenced.
Are you just stating truisms or are you making a point I’m not seeing?
A homosexual maybe socially pressured to have a nuclear family, but it doesn’t make him or her the same as someone straight. 

Though the distinction I make, lies between procreation and recreation. Homosexual sex is a recreational derivative of the procreational drive, as are the many other methods of achieving sexual satisfaction. Choices Choices Choices.
Although there are social elements.

And as I keep stressing "gay" as in relationship choices,  is a social construct and nothing whatsoever to do with genetics.
Relationships are downstream from sexual orientation. You’re treating them as if they’re on par.
You might as well have also said ‘and as I keep stressing "straight" as in relationship choices,  is a social construct and nothing whatsoever to do with genetics.’

As for animals......My dog is happy to hump my leg, and my tortoise goes a bundle on my work boots......So is this special genetics or just the urge to procreate in the absence of an appropriate mate?
There are animals that have lifelong gay relationships. It’s not just about getting off. 

As for history...Nature has always thrown up developmental obscurities. That's stating the obvious....And homosexual sex has long since been a method of achieving orgasm.
Males and females both have backsides, mouths and hands. What method are you talking about exactly? 

So why do such protagonists have to keep writing so much into the justification of the obvious....Because historically, and (contrary to popular thinking) also currently, homosexual sex is a social taboo. 
Is there a specific point you’re making?
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 4,895
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
--> @Reece101
CAH...By your definition is a physiological anomaly....As is DSD.

A Man or Women might be socially pressured for sure....What's new.

A homosexual is a Man that  participates in recreational sex with another man.

The nuclear family is as much a social construct as a gay relationship is.

And if you think about it, society is all about the pressures of conformity.

Sexual orientation is how we describe recreational sex preferences.

And correct.... Straight is a social construct also....Relative to heterosexual sex acts. 

And animals don't recognise the human concept of "Gay".  Please elaborate on this idea.

Not at all certain of the purpose of the hands, mouth and backside reference. Please elaborate on this idea too.


Is there a point?

Every new generation assumes that it discovered this new and amazing thing called sex.

And the current lot  think that they have discovered this new and exciting thing called "Gay".....Sorry, it's been around for millennia and is nothing new.

So why the constant need to justify ones actions with elaborate explanations?


Urgency...Sex act....Orgasm....Temporary satisfaction achieved....Roll over and go to sleep....And repeat.....Same old, same old.

It makes no difference who or what you might choose to share the bed with.
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 791
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
--> @zedvictor4
Yes, the definition is correct. 

You didn’t answer whether you’re making a point? 

Yes all relationships are social constructs. Whoopty freakin do! 

Yes, societies in the status quo require conformity for better or for worse. 

Sexual orientations aren’t fetishes. Saying sexual orientation is a “preference” feeds into the idea that being gay or straight is a choice. 

By animals having lifelong gay relationships I meant lifelong same sex relationships. I didn’t say anything about them understanding human concepts. 
You didn’t have a substantive argument, hah? 

The question I was getting at was, what is the ‘homosexual method of achieving ejaculation’ which a straight couple can’t achieve?

It just seems like you’re oversimplifying sexual orientation to the point of portraying it as a choice.
Is it a choice?





Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 3,302
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
--> @zedvictor4
You missed my point - being gay is a brain state, like enjoying vanilla ice cream over chocolate - I'm not talking about acting gay in sex or whatever, I'm specifically referring to the attraction of the same gender that the definition of gay is stated to be - that is not a choice. I'm not gonna deal with your bullshit again. Read thoroughly or go away. 
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 4,895
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
--> @Reece101
Yes your definition was correct...I agreed....Physiological abnormalities are separate issues.

All relationships are social constructs...You agree....Not genetics...Whoopty freakin do!

Societies require conformity...We agree.

No one mentioned fetishes...We were discussing standard recreational sex choices....No whipped cream necessary.

Life long same sex relationships....Most creatures will have life long same sex relationships  of some description.....You still need to elaborate upon this, as it's not yet a substantive argument.

Hah?....?


Data in, data assessment, data storage, data out.  Choice is the process of analysing data and making a decision.

The point was, we are not discussing anything new. Homosexual recreational sex is  an old hat, time worn option. But  nowadays we have  more elaborate explanations as to why why we make the decisions that we do.

Urgency....Sex act.....Temporary satisfaction achieved.....Roll over and go to sleep....And repeat....Same old same old.

Justification not required....Ah!....Unfortunately not so......Hence "Being gay isn't a chioce".

What is really being asked is......It is OK for a man to enjoy recreational sex with another man isn't it.

And I say yes it is, it's absolutely fine, a perfectly functional solution to ones unavoidable requirements.... Has been for donkey's years, so stop making a song and dance about it....And give the whipped cream a go.....Your choice though.







zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 4,895
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
@Theweakeredge.

Fundamentally being human is a brain state....No brain, zilch....And some people enjoy vanilla and chocolate....And some people just love ice cream...And some don't like it at all.

And attraction is attraction....Your just stating the obvious.



Some men are attractive and some men are more attractive than some women, but I choose not to partake in sex with attractive men....Social conditioning ...An acquired brain state.

Social conditioning is somewhat more liberal  these days, in certain societies.  So consequently, some people have the social freedom to  openly choose how they satisfy their sex drive.  If I had been born 20 years ago, then who knows what different socially inspired  choices I would have made.

So you choose.....Chocolate or vanilla or both....And stop bullshitting.

Though fundamentally, ice cream is still ice cream.....And flavours are a tasty modifications thereof.

Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 791
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
--> @zedvictor4
let’s focus on one thing at a time. 

No one mentioned fetishes...We were discussing standard recreational sex choices....No whipped cream necessary.
By “standard recreational sex choices” do you mean a bisexual deciding whether to sleep with a man or a women?
That’s the closest sexual orientation comes to choice. But that has nothing to with with the original proposition. The title states ‘Being gay Isn’t choice.’
Do you think you’re only gay or straight during sexual intercourse, and everyone is bisexual (Schrodinger's Cat if you will) when not having sex?
Your whole thought process is a clusterfuck I’m trying to figure out.