If a gay or lesbien want to back normal?

[columbus]

Kinsey scale 2 here. (Although, sometimes I feel more like a 3 on occasion.)

You identify as bi and think you're a 2?

You straight people are a hoot.

If you must have an opposite sex partner you're straight. Despite all the advantages of being male and having a male partner you still want normal.

I don't blame you. I would if I could. But I'm more like a 5. I could do it with women when I was young and horny. But I couldn't get it up with Lindsay Logan now. I'm married.

Tom

 

[psychoslice]

There is no such thing as being normal, like who's definition of normal are we going to believe ?, you see, its ridiculers.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

You identify as bi and think you're a 2?

You straight people are a hoot.

If you must have an opposite sex partner you're straight. Despite all the advantages of being male and having a male partner you still want normal.

I don't blame you. I would if I could. But I'm more like a 5. I could do it with women when I was young and horny. But I couldn't get it up with Lindsay Logan now. I'm married.

Tom

Talk about rude. Who are you to decide someone else's sexual orientation? I'm mostly attracted to women, myself, but there's some guys who catch my fancy. Saying I'm straight ignores that dimension of my sexuality and I'm sure @Triumphant_Loser feels much the same way. It's not black and white. It's so stupid since they're social identities at the end of the day.

I don't think straight or gay people have an inherent advantage in their relationships. There's crappy men and crappy women, so gays and straights both have nothing to really boast about.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

You identify as bi and think you're a 2?

You straight people are a hoot.

If you must have an opposite sex partner you're straight. Despite all the advantages of being male and having a male partner you still want normal.

I don't blame you. I would if I could. But I'm more like a 5. I could do it with women when I was young and horny. But I couldn't get it up with Lindsay Logan now. I'm married.

Tom

"You're identifying your own sexuality wrong, here, let me do it for you."

Biphobia and bisexual erasure is still alive and kicking in the gay community, so it seems.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

You identify as bi and think you're a 2?

You straight people are a hoot.

If you must have an opposite sex partner you're straight. Despite all the advantages of being male and having a male partner you still want normal.

I don't blame you. I would if I could. But I'm more like a 5. I could do it with women when I was young and horny. But I couldn't get it up with Lindsay Logan now. I'm married.

Tom

A 0 is totally heterosexual.
1 is heterosexual with homosexual tendencies and desires generally with only a few cases.
2 is heterosexual with homosexual desires that aren't just with a few specific inviduals or types but rather a prefrence for women.
3 is dead center.
4 is the reverse of 2
5 the reverse of 1 (being that you could find certain women attractive but mainly concerned with men)
6 being 10% fabulous.

I am a 1 on the scale and I believe most heterosexuals are. A 2 is easily qualified as bisexual so I don't understand why you would assume otherwise.

 

[LuisDantas]

A 0 is totally heterosexual.
1 is heterosexual with homosexual tendencies and desires generally with only a few cases.
2 is heterosexual with homosexual desires that aren't just with a few specific inviduals or types but rather a prefrence for women.
3 is dead center.
4 is the reverse of 2
5 the reverse of 1 (being that you could find certain women attractive but mainly concerned with men)
6 being 10% fabulous.

I am a 1 on the scale and I believe most heterosexuals are. A 2 is easily qualified as bisexual so I don't understand why you would assume otherwise.

Because you are not using the same scale. See this extrat from a previous post:

By the Kinsey scale, a 1 is someone who could never enjoy sex with their own gender. A 6 is someone who could never enjoy sex with someone of the opposite gender. There aren't very many people that extreme.

You are using a 0-6 scale, Columbus a 1-6 scale.

No, I don't know which of the two is correct, but clearly you give very clashing interpretations to what a "1" means.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

Because you are not using the same scale. See this extrat from a previous post:



You are using a 0-6 scale, Columbus a 1-6 scale.

No, I don't know which of the two is correct, but clearly you give very clashing interpretations to what a "1" means.

Monk of Reason's view of the Kinsey scale is the more accurate one. Quite simply... 0 is 100% heterosexual, while 6 is 100% homosexual. (Some scales also include an X before level 0 or after level 6 to account for asexuals as well.)

 

[SkepticThinker]

Thank you, we appreciate it.
It was hard. You never get over it, you just get used to it.
It was many years ago. Hard to believe it but little Bethany is now a teenager.

Tom

Wow. Yeah, it doesn't strike me as something anybody could ever get over. I imagine it's something that's probably still very difficult to talk about as well.

 

[Mycroft]

It's a complicated issue: 'What if a homosexual wants to be straight?'

Scientifically, it can quite easily be done. Studies into genetic links to behaviour (such as schizophrenia) show that the influence of the gene over actual behaviour is extremely weak and, in many cases, people who had the schizophrenic gene, did not manifest schizophrenia. Those that did proved remarkably responsive to therapy. The same is true of the epigentic link to homosexuality, the epigene markers themselves assert only a very weak influence over behaviour (homosexuality is both inborn and a choice, but not a simple cognitive choice) so, yes, a gay person can get therapy to become straight.

The problem is, however: should it be done? It raises many ethical and moral questions which stem from the old practices of 'curing' homosexuality as a deviancy in the days of yore.

 

[LuisDantas]

Besides, it is an atrocity.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

"You're identifying your own sexuality wrong, here, let me do it for you."

Biphobia and bisexual erasure is still alive and kicking in the gay community, so it seems.

As well as implicit self-hatred.

 

[Jumi]

If it would be possible to genetically engineer all people into "straight 0" on the scale, would Abrahamic religious accept genetic engineering?

 

[Jainarayan]

If it would be possible to genetically engineer all people into "straight 0" on the scale, would Abrahamic religious accept genetic engineering?

Probably not. It's not being homosexual that is the problem, it's having same sex relations they object to. Therefore, prayer to overcome the desire to have sex is the answer.

 

[Jumi]

Yeah prayer to be something other than what "God fashioned you in the womb" to be. Why would "God" accept prayers denying his wisdom in the first place?

I think it's sad we can't accept people as they are.

 

[suncowiam]

I'm just gonna be a devil's advocate so as to add more to this discussion.

I stand by equality based on sex, race, age, and sexual orientation.

But what if we isolated a gene common to all serial murderers and found it is the cause for such behavior. Would it be ethical to filter against that gene? You fill in the blank concerning what filter means.

 

[Jainarayan]

I'm just gonna be a devil's advocate so as to add more to this discussion.

I stand by equality based on sex, race, age, and sexual orientation.

But what if we isolated a gene common to all serial murderers and found it is the cause for such behavior. Would it be ethical to filter against that gene? You fill in the blank concerning what filter means.

This is working under the false presumption that there is A gay gene. No one has ever said there is, any more than there is a straight gene. Like anything else, sexual orientation is probably a combination of genes. The human genome project found no marker for race either.

 

[LuisDantas]

I'm just gonna be a devil's advocate so as to add more to this discussion.

I stand by equality based on sex, race, age, and sexual orientation.

But what if we isolated a gene common to all serial murderers and found it is the cause for such behavior. Would it be ethical to filter against that gene? You fill in the blank concerning what filter means.

Wrong thread?

 

[Nietzsche]

This is working under the false presumption that there is A gay gene. No one has ever said there is, any more than there is a straight gene. Like anything else, sexual orientation is probably a combination of genes. The human genome project found no marker for race either.

I love the human genome project. It turns out we're made up of a lot less than what we thought, and that defective genes are infinitely more important than anyone realized.

 

[LuisDantas]

This is working under the false presumption that there is A gay gene. No one has ever said there is, any more than there is a straight gene. Like anything else, sexual orientation is probably a combination of genes. The human genome project found no marker for race either.

Besides, a fair part of human sexuality is determined by hormones and probably other factors that we do not really understand as of now.

More to the point, what would entitle us to purposefully meddle into the sexuality of others?

 

[columbus]

Wow. Yeah, it doesn't strike me as something anybody could ever get over. I imagine it's something that's probably still very difficult to talk about as well.

No not so much.
It will probably make me sound like a dreadful cynic, but to me it is just another tragedy. They're a dime a dozen. I've probably been to a hundred funerals for people who died young. I was a really out gay guy in the 80's. The AIDS thing.
I'm pretty hard. I have little patience for people who clutch their victimhood like a security blanket. It brings out my sarcastic tendencies.

Worse things happened to people while you read this sentence.

Tom