Heterosexuals

[Pop Daddy]

Did you choose that orientation?

yes, I had to force myself to want breast im my hands

 

[sweet angel]

yes, I had to force myself to want breast im my hands

I just snorted and spit water all over the place. Will you marry me?

 

[SillyMe]

Can we dance on the bar together?

Well you are the Dancing Queen, are you not? I'll dance, but I am NOT singing karaoke.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Glad to know I'm not alone in that one.

I personally wish we could separate the concepts of political and religious marriage. I fall into the "civil unions for all" camp (which may be a camp of one ). I think we should all have one secular civil union if you will, that would apply to 2 consenting, non-related adults and that would cover all of the legal/governmental aspects of marriage (taxes, inheritance, benefits). All couples, regardless of orientation, would have this union and then could either leave it at that or go on for a religious solemnization.

"Marriage" as a sacrament or whatever could then be handled by churches as they see fit. I don't care too much about what they do since they're private organizations. "Marriage" shouldn't be a legal state at all, but a private religious experience like baptism or confirmation.

I like that idea too. We've been through this whole dance on the "telling kids about gay people" thread and we still don't know how the existence of gay folks living their lives or getting married affects anyone else's ability to live their lives and get married.

To answer the OP's question: I was engaged to a very cute boy named Johnny that sat behind me on the bus to Kindergarten. Guess that means I chose when I was 5.
However, I do like the Indigo Girls...does that make me Bi??

 

[L107ANGEL]

Gee, we really think we're cute with the leading questions, don't we?

The correct answer is, not for fundamentalist Mormons who take their religion every bit as seriously as you do yours. You, of course, think that they are totally wrong and that your religion is right. On the other hand, they feel that polygamy brings them closer to their god and that your way is incorrect.

I'm grateful for the wisdom of the founding fathers who anticipated religious extremists like you and made sure that the Constitution stood firmly between your petty myopia and the rights of others to pursue life, liberty and happiness as they see fit with any other consenting adult that they damn well please.

It's a shame your narrow religious zealotry blinds you to that.

Since were pairing off! Can I even date you?

 

[Pop Daddy]

I just snorted and spit water all over the place. Will you marry me?

yesssss , bring them puppys over to me

 

[meeskamouska]

I think I knew I was straight when, at about four,the lady on TV yelled "Where's the beef?", and I knew wanted some!!!

 

[meeskamouska]

This is an exerpt from one of my discussion assignments in my Diveristy class...the argurment here today often comes up in this class and here is some information I have about gender identity!! I think any of these concepts can be applied to the topic of sexuality. Please note we were discussing trans-gendered individuals....

"We are taught very little about what makes us male, female, or transgenderd. In school we are taught the very rudementray concepts of genetics.

The article never state her chromosomal identity. Chromosome, unlike what many believe, are not always xx or xy. This exerpt is from the test book Dr. Stiles uses in her gender class:

"....there are occasional variations in the sex chromosomes. Some people have an xo chromosomal pair. In other cases, there are three rather than the usual two, chromosomes that determine sex: xxx, xxy, or xyy sex chromosomes. Occasionally, an individual will have some xy cells and some xx cells. All fetuses (and people) have cells with at least one x chromosome because it carries genes essential to life.

Some children are born with the some biological characteristics of each sex....the term intersexed is preferred by people who have biological qualities of each sex.

When pregnancy proceeds routinely, fetuses with a y chromosome are bathed in
androgens that ensure development of male sex organs, and fetuses without a y chromosome recieve fewer androgens, so female sex organs develop. In some cases however, a genetically female fetus(XX) is exposed to high level of pregesterone and may not develop teh usual female genitalia. Th opposite is also true: If a male fetus is deprived of progesterone during the critical period of sexual differentation, his male genitalia may not develop, and he will appear physically female."

Gendered Lives---Julia T Wood page 21"

There are some many things we are still discovering about what make us male and female, what makes us attracted to males or females and to put us all into little boxes is unrealistic.
If these type of gender changes can occur I believe so can sexual attraction and identity.

I hope that by opening some eyes to the fact that we are not all one sex or another...and with this fact we are not always attracted to the same or opposite sex....someone will walk away with a new perspective and open thier mind and research all possibilities...not just the ones that make you feel comfortable.

 

[Pop Daddy]

This is an exerpt from one of my discussion assignments in my Diveristy class...the argurment here today often comes up in this class and here is some information I have about gender identity!! I think any of these concepts can be applied to the topic of sexuality. Please note we were discussing trans-gendered individuals....

"We are taught very little about what makes us male, female, or transgenderd. In school we are taught the very rudementray concepts of genetics.

The article never state her chromosomal identity. Chromosome, unlike what many believe, are not always xx or xy. This exerpt is from the test book Dr. Stiles uses in her gender class:

"....there are occasional variations in the sex chromosomes. Some people have an xo chromosomal pair. In other cases, there are three rather than the usual two, chromosomes that determine sex: xxx, xxy, or xyy sex chromosomes. Occasionally, an individual will have some xy cells and some xx cells. All fetuses (and people) have cells with at least one x chromosome because it carries genes essential to life.

Some children are born with the some biological characteristics of each sex....the term intersexed is preferred by people who have biological qualities of each sex.

When pregnancy proceeds routinely, fetuses with a y chromosome are bathed in
androgens that ensure development of male sex organs, and fetuses without a y chromosome recieve fewer androgens, so female sex organs develop. In some cases however, a genetically female fetus(XX) is exposed to high level of pregesterone and may not develop teh usual female genitalia. Th opposite is also true: If a male fetus is deprived of progesterone during the critical period of sexual differentation, his male genitalia may not develop, and he will appear physically female."

Gendered Lives---Julia T Wood page 21"

There are some many things we are still discovering about what make us male and female, what makes us attracted to males or females and to put us all into little boxes is unrealistic.
If these type of gender changes can occur I believe so can sexual attraction and identity.

I hope that by opening some eyes to the fact that we are not all one sex or another...and with this fact we are not always attracted to the same or opposite sex....someone will walk away with a new perspective and open thier mind and research all possibilities...not just the ones that make you feel comfortable.

so in short, why do I like to give out the yabahoo squeeze ?

 

[meeskamouska]

According to this about gender...it may have something to do with the amount of androgens and pregesterone that you were exposed to as a fetus....noone really knows....

 

[Pop Daddy]

According to this about gender...it may have something to do with the amount of androgens and pregesterone that you were exposed to as a fetus....noone really knows....

I must have been expossed to lots

 

[rt2dz]

Oh fiddle sticks!

I had to busy in the real world today.

 

[User Name]

Sue, great idea for a thread...I always pose this question in the gay debate threads to heteros and there is never a real answer. We have the holier-than thou attitude as described by User Name so perfectly.

When a hetero man can choose to be gay for a while, I will then choose to be straight. I think I just made my point.

Excuse me. How was that a "holier than thou" response.

My reply was purely logical and scientific.

Homosexuality can NOT propagate the species. Since the prime purpose of anything alive is to procreate, homosexuality is unnatural or abnormal.

I did not say there was anything wrong with it, nor did I imply that homosexuals were any better or worse than heterosexuals.

I merely stated that in nature, homosexuality is abnormal, meaning outside of the normal.

Do you disagree with the above? Do you disagree that outside of self preservation, procreation is the prime directive of living organisms? Can you tell me exactly HOW a species can procreate homosexually?

So, if you have some sort of issue with who you are, that's YOUR issue, don't make it mine, and don't imply that I think any homosexual is in any way "less" than any heterosexual.

That's not for me to judge.

I was making a biological observation.

 

[smartestnumber5]

There is a person I know well that, though gay, has chosen to not live the "gay life-style". That was the choice this person made for religious reasons. He chose to marry (he explained this to his wife before they were married) and has children. I know this hasn't always been easy for him. He used to be involved with an accountability group before he moved. Not sure if he's found another group since then.

So, I guess my answer to the original question might be "no", the orientation isn't a choice, but everyone has a choice as to what kind of life they want to lead.

(Not directing this at you ElizK)

What is wrong with this woman? She must be an idiot! Seriously, maybe a good test for how committed people are about the whole "being gay is a choice thing" is whether or not they'd advise their child to marry an ex-gay. (Assuming, of course, that one actually wants what is best for one's child--including a decent sex-life and a marriage with actual romantic love).

 

[TurboKitty]

Excuse me. How was that a "holier than thou" response.

My reply was purely logical and scientific.

Homosexuality can NOT propagate the species. Since the prime purpose of anything alive is to procreate, homosexuality is unnatural or abnormal.

I did not say there was anything wrong with it, nor did I imply that homosexuals were any better or worse than heterosexuals.

I merely stated that in nature, homosexuality is abnormal, meaning outside of the normal.

Do you disagree with the above? Do you disagree that outside of self preservation, procreation is the prime directive of living organisms? Can you tell me exactly HOW a species can procreate homosexually?
So, if you have some sort of issue with who you are, that's YOUR issue, don't make it mine, and don't imply that I think any homosexual is in any way "less" than any heterosexual.

That's not for me to judge.

I was making a biological observation.

If you're certain kinds of fishes, you spontaneously change gender in a single sex environ. Ain't nature grand?

 

[smartestnumber5]

Simple.

Nature dictates that homosexuality cannot be "normal."

The first, most basic fundamental of nature is to reproduce - to further the species. That cannot happen in a homosexual relationship

That doesn't mean that homosexuals are wrong or bad or less than a heterosexual. Just that "nature" doesn't intend for homosexuality to be the norm, else the species would cease to exist.

By this logic nature also dictates that being male isn't normal because if EVERYONE were male, then the species would cease to exist.

Excuse me. How was that a "holier than thou" response.

My reply was purely logical and scientific.

Homosexuality can NOT propagate the species. Since the prime purpose of anything alive is to procreate, homosexuality is unnatural or abnormal.

I did not say there was anything wrong with it, nor did I imply that homosexuals were any better or worse than heterosexuals.

I merely stated that in nature, homosexuality is abnormal, meaning outside of the normal.

Do you disagree with the above? Do you disagree that outside of self preservation, procreation is the prime directive of living organisms? Can you tell me exactly HOW a species can procreate homosexually?

So, if you have some sort of issue with who you are, that's YOUR issue, don't make it mine, and don't imply that I think any homosexual is in any way "less" than any heterosexual.

That's not for me to judge.

I was making a biological observation.

Actually there is an answer to this. One of the going evolutionary biology/psychology explanations of the existence of homosexuality is that having a small number of homosexual individuals is actually beneficial for the species or group of animals/humans as a whole.

Some studies have found that children who have a gay uncle or aunt tend to be better off in various ways than kids who have a straight uncle or aunt or none at all. The hypothesized explanation in evolutionary terms is that a gay animal or human would not reproduce and therefore would have a lot of extra resources compared to animals/humans who have reproduced a half dozen times or more. The extra resources of the gay individual would likely get put into helping one's relatives and other group members raise their kids. Thus, those kids would be better able to survive than kids with only straight family members. And since the kids with gay aunts/uncles would have some of their same genes, the hereditary basis of homosexuality could be passed on to the next generation.


In any case, whether homosexuality is "normal" or not in the sense of being common or being evolutionarily beneficial, the term "normal" does have some pretty negative connotations. For example, would you go on a thread about infertility and declare it "abnormal" and then explain, "Oh, I just meant in the evolutionary sense"?

 

[Goofyluver]

Excuse me. How was that a "holier than thou" response.

My reply was purely logical and scientific.

Homosexuality can NOT propagate the species. Since the prime purpose of anything alive is to procreate, homosexuality is unnatural or abnormal.

I did not say there was anything wrong with it, nor did I imply that homosexuals were any better or worse than heterosexuals.

I merely stated that in nature, homosexuality is abnormal, meaning outside of the normal.

Do you disagree with the above? Do you disagree that outside of self preservation, procreation is the prime directive of living organisms? Can you tell me exactly HOW a species can procreate homosexually?

So, if you have some sort of issue with who you are, that's YOUR issue, don't make it mine, and don't imply that I think any homosexual is in any way "less" than any heterosexual.

That's not for me to judge.

I was making a biological observation.

#1. If homosexuality was abnormal or "unnatural", then nature would not support the birthing of homosexual beings...meaning no one would be homosexual

#2. Ever heard of IVF? Adoption? Surrogacy? These all occur through "natural" means, meaning someone carries the baby...gosh, we are sooo advanced nowadays!

#3. You did judge. You called homosexuality abnormal and "unnatural"...of course only for biological observation's sake!

 

[Tiggernut_jadie]

Excuse me. How was that a "holier than thou" response.

My reply was purely logical and scientific.

Homosexuality can NOT propagate the species. Since the prime purpose of anything alive is to procreate, homosexuality is unnatural or abnormal.

I did not say there was anything wrong with it, nor did I imply that homosexuals were any better or worse than heterosexuals.

I merely stated that in nature, homosexuality is abnormal, meaning outside of the normal.

Do you disagree with the above? Do you disagree that outside of self preservation, procreation is the prime directive of living organisms? Can you tell me exactly HOW a species can procreate homosexually?

So, if you have some sort of issue with who you are, that's YOUR issue, don't make it mine, and don't imply that I think any homosexual is in any way "less" than any heterosexual.

That's not for me to judge.

I was making a biological observation.

un·nat·u·ral adj.
In violation of a natural law.
Inconsistent with an individual pattern or custom.
Deviating from a behavioral or social norm: an unnatural attachment.
Contrived or constrained; artificial: smiled in an unnatural manner.
In violation of natural feelings; inhuman.

ab·nor·mal adj.
Not typical, usual, or regular; not normal; deviant.

See now, whilst I'm sure you would point to some of the definitions as the way in which you meant your post, I have a niggling feeling (call me a cynic if you like) that you're really coming from the angle of the definitions I've highlighted!

Just making a n observation obviously!!!!

 

[Poppinsme]

Well I am a weird one. I live with a straight man and a gay man for years and years now. My DH is straight and my other BFF is gay. WHOOOHOOOO!!
Im screwed up. And my DH is not gay just one very cool person like me baby.

 

[NewJersey]

Excuse me. How was that a "holier than thou" response.

My reply was purely logical and scientific.

Homosexuality can NOT propagate the species. Since the prime purpose of anything alive is to procreate, homosexuality is unnatural or abnormal.

I did not say there was anything wrong with it, nor did I imply that homosexuals were any better or worse than heterosexuals.

I merely stated that in nature, homosexuality is abnormal, meaning outside of the normal.

Do you disagree with the above? Do you disagree that outside of self preservation, procreation is the prime directive of living organisms? Can you tell me exactly HOW a species can procreate homosexually?

So, if you have some sort of issue with who you are, that's YOUR issue, don't make it mine, and don't imply that I think any homosexual is in any way "less" than any heterosexual.

That's not for me to judge.

I was making a biological observation.

Artificial insemination.

Exactly what were you doing when you called homosexuality unnatural? I'd say you were judging.