-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What is the 'cause' of homsexuality?
- Thread starter Nehustan
- Start date
Nehustan
Well-Known Member
I know we had some crazy Bishop thing here. There's a vicar who WAS gay, loves his partner, but due to the conflict with the churches teachings he had chosen sexual celibacy, tho' maintained his loving relationship, pretty much playing it by the book IMHO. Was that good enough, that he was honest and had stopped the behaviour that people found offensive...yeh right...they still moaned about him becoming a bishop...brings a whole new concept to our expression 'bashing the bishop'Tek said:
standing_on_one_foot
Well-Known Member
Bit like saying a straight woman's afraid of women, innit?Solon said:
PS: Too crazy for the forum? Hmm...is that possible? As long as ya play relatively nice, it's never seemed a problem before.
Flappycat
Well-Known Member
No, you're quite the usual. Snag a chair, and make yourself cozy. Besides, it's cold out, and you wouldn't want to go torpid and wake up covered in graffiti. We may have jackets one of these days. That'll be a thermal one for you, eh?Tek said:
I've actually known quite a few gay blokes who could be described as nonsexual. They get their share of affection from their others, yes, but they don't care for sex. The thing is, they're some of the nicest people I know, huggier than snakes who just crawled in out of the snow, so I generally take it as a positive sign in a person. You know what I mean?
maggie2
Active Member
Has anyone ever done a poll on what causes hetrosexuality? Why is it that we feel it is so important to understand the cause of homosexuality but we never think to stop and ask what causes hetrosexuality?
Homosexuality just IS...just like hetrosexuality just IS. Personally I believe that sexual preference is probably genetic, just like eye color and hair color are genetic. But I really don't know and actually, I really don't care. What I care about is allowing homosexual people to live without us hetrosexuals peering at them like they are strange creatures.
Homosexuality just IS...just like hetrosexuality just IS. Personally I believe that sexual preference is probably genetic, just like eye color and hair color are genetic. But I really don't know and actually, I really don't care. What I care about is allowing homosexual people to live without us hetrosexuals peering at them like they are strange creatures.
Nehustan
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure, but the question has been asked in this thread, maybe I can be semantic and pose the question 'what cause(s) does sexuality serve?' A bias laden question? Maybe. I'm sure that there is certainly more than one, if we answered this then maybe we could view individual sexuality from within that context. This thread however was not started to juxtoppose heterosexuality contra homosexuality, more as an invitation to ask people what they considered to be the causation of their sexuality, which the early posts managed quite amiably. Maybe rather than posing the question (I'm presuming you're straight) you should just have gone ahead and answered it?maggie2 said:
gnomon
Well-Known Member
The real question is what determines sexuality. I personally believe it is primary developed through prenatal hormonal development, the process of puberty and influenced (only on ones perception) by environment.
Why is it important for us to know? First of all, any argument where people say there is nothing to question and should just accept have already lost the argument. Its the same argument made for prejudice. Second of all, increasing public knowledge about the natural development of human sexuality is the best way to lead to a wider acceptance and understanding of not just homosexuals but also those people who deal with an even greater stigma, intersex, or those who are pushed off to the side and not taken seriously, such as those with down syndrome. The subject is not just about the sexual standing of those who meet physical or intellectual norms.
A final note. There are many people who like to point out the high rates of drug abuse and 'psychological disorders' of homosexuals. I assume when someone has the majority of the entire society putting negative pressure on an individual for doing nothing wrong then self-destructive behaviors can manifest themselves. At the root is the problem with society. Not the individual.
Why is it important for us to know? First of all, any argument where people say there is nothing to question and should just accept have already lost the argument. Its the same argument made for prejudice. Second of all, increasing public knowledge about the natural development of human sexuality is the best way to lead to a wider acceptance and understanding of not just homosexuals but also those people who deal with an even greater stigma, intersex, or those who are pushed off to the side and not taken seriously, such as those with down syndrome. The subject is not just about the sexual standing of those who meet physical or intellectual norms.
A final note. There are many people who like to point out the high rates of drug abuse and 'psychological disorders' of homosexuals. I assume when someone has the majority of the entire society putting negative pressure on an individual for doing nothing wrong then self-destructive behaviors can manifest themselves. At the root is the problem with society. Not the individual.
Super Universe
Defender of God
Usually women have two X chromosomes and men have one X and one Y chromosome but there are cases where there are XY women and XX men. This is a genetic basis for homosexuality.
But this genetic basis does not explain every occurence of homosexuality so there must be more to it. It is either more genetic than we currently understand (certainly) or there is another, probably environmental factor.
But this genetic basis does not explain every occurence of homosexuality so there must be more to it. It is either more genetic than we currently understand (certainly) or there is another, probably environmental factor.
greatcalgarian
Well-Known Member
It is genetic. But I believe very few are born 100% heterosexual or 100% homosexual. Sexuality developed as you grow older and the environment events you experience may then shaped you moving towards heterosexual or homosexual. Most heterosexual may have started as 95% hetero 5% homo, but became 100% heterosexual due to society pressure, where the 5% is effectively being suppressed in the process of growing up.
Another theory is that it is nature way of population control. Just joking.
Another theory is that it is nature way of population control. Just joking.
Bastet
Vile Stove-Toucher
All you really need to do to find your answers, Nehustan, is to ask yourself the following:Nehustan said:
1.) What do you find attractive about women
a.) Physically
b.) Emotionally
c.) Intellectually
and subsequently
2.) What do you find unattractive about men
a.) Physically
b.) Emotionally
c.) Intellectually
You'd be surprised at how similar the answers will be.
Bastet
Vile Stove-Toucher
Goodness, what a twisted bit of logic, Solon! :areyoucra By your reckoning, then, if you are a man who does not want to have sex with other men, then you are afraid of men. As Maize has already said, not being attracted to someone or not wanting to have sex with them, is not the same as being afraid of them. It simply means that you don't wish to bump uglies with them.Maize said:
Are you afraid of every woman that you are not attracted to or don't want to have sex with? You must lead a very fear-filled life if that's the case...I feel the need to point out something about attraction that some people I know just don't seem to get:
A person (whether gay or straight, man or woman), can think that another person (again, gay or straight, man or woman), is attractive without automatically being attracted to them, or wanting to have sex with them. There is a difference. I am a lesbian; I am not blind - I can appreciate a good looking man without wanting to jump his bones. Just because I can look at (for example) Johnny Depp's bone structure, skin tone, and deep brown eyes and think "yeah, he's hot", does not mean that I want to do the wild thing with him. It does not mean that I'm in denial, it does not mean that I'm really bi or straight, it just means that Johnny Depp is a good looking bloke, and I'd be lying if I said I thought otherwise. I know a lot of women who think Angelina Jolie is a hottie, but none of them want to get naked with her either.
Kinda off topic, I know, but I felt the need.
Bastet
Vile Stove-Toucher
Perhaps if you'd looked at the rest of her post, and not just the part you quoted, you'd have seen that she did just that. [emphasis mine]Nehustan said:
maggie2 said:
Her use of the words 'sexual preference' neatly encompases both homosexual and heterosexual, wouldn't you say?
Nehustan
Well-Known Member
maggie2 said:
Nehustan said:
I had to read back as this thread was from a while ago but you are right.However, if you 'looked at the rest of her post, and not just the part you' emphasised, my own ponderings on my sexuality in this thread, and in fact my rationale for this thread was a heated discussion in another thread where people were called 'unnatural', this thread was then for the people at that time to explain what their particular thoughts were on the causation of their sexuality (as I have stated throughout), which as I said we managed well while it was the people from the other thread. Of course things weren't going to end there. I think my point in saying to maggie that if she wanted to discuss her sexuality as a heterosexual in the same way as the issue of homosexuality had been adressed (as I did myself) then she should, which she did in part, rapidly negating it with , in my opinion withBastet said:Perhaps if you'd looked at the rest of her post, and not just the part you quoted, you'd have seen that she did just that. [emphasis mine]
Her use of the words 'sexual preference' neatly encompases both homosexual and heterosexual, wouldn't you say?
maggie2 said:
Although I'll admit 'sexual preference' very well sums up both homosexual/hetrosexual issues at the same time, I'm not certain she actually gave it much thought, she didn't convince me to the contrary.