|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: If homosexuality is a sin, is it on a par with the "sin" of nose picking?
|
|
|
TonyK
Host Emeritus
# 35
|
Posted
Has the Ship called a T 'n' T week without my noticing it?
This thread seems to have drifted waaaaayyy off course.... far TMI!
Interesting though it may be for some, let's get back to the original topic please.
Yours aye ... TonyK
Host, Dead Horses
Posts: 2717 | From: Gloucestershire | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142
|
Posted
Indeed so, and (from many historical accounts) submitted to ordinary sex too, because in many cases a woman actually enjoying sex was seen as a Bad Thing and Sinful. Even in my mother's generation, "lie back and think of England" was the advice given to young newlywed women.
The interesting thing is that research on consensual heterosexual sex shows that (for example in one study) 11 out of the 15 women participating were found to have a degree of injury after sex, including bruising and/or minor tearing. Another study found the same in 56 out of 314 (18%) women who had consensual sex.
(x-posted with host -apologies)
[ 02. October 2010, 17:04: Message edited by: amber. ]
Posts: 5102 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
Going back to the "ick factor" for a moment, I'm not sure it's as constant as it's portrayed to be. Given what I understand about the consumer demographics of lesbian-themed pornography, and that yaoi is marketed almost exclusively to straight women, a positive reaction to homosexuality seems common enough to support several booming businesses.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ToujoursDan
Ship's prole
# 10578
|
Posted
Surely a large aspect of the ick factor revolves around historic misogyny and sexism, in that a man is offending gender roles by choosing the "female" role of receptor. In many strongly patriarchal cultures being the active partner in the anal sex act is considered far more "manly" than being the passive partner. Those who are in the passive role are more acceptable in these societies if they are effeminate than if they are masculine.
Societies that have less differentiation between male and female roles seem to have less prejudice against male homosexuality.
--------------------
"Many people say I embarrass them with my humility" - Archbishop Peter Akinola
Facebook link: http://www.facebook.com/toujoursdan
Posts: 3734 | From: NYC | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Christian Agnostic
Shipmate
# 14912
|
Posted
I think the "ick" factor with regards to human feces might by instinctual. I was trying to point that out in the OP.
--------------------
Words to the wise: Don't read Kierkegaard when you're 16, and always set B.S. detectors to 11. "How can I sing a strange song in the Lord's land?"
Posts: 493 | From: The Great North Woods | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ToujoursDan
Ship's prole
# 10578
|
Posted
With just a 5 minute cleaning prior to the event, it's quite possible to have an evening of vigorous and pleasurable anal sex without any interaction with feces at all. It's not that hard to clean the human bowel. Douche or give yourself an enema and you're right as rain.
Nose picking's intent is quite different.
[ 04. October 2010, 20:47: Message edited by: ToujoursDan ]
--------------------
"Many people say I embarrass them with my humility" - Archbishop Peter Akinola
Facebook link: http://www.facebook.com/toujoursdan
Posts: 3734 | From: NYC | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gracious rebel
Rainbow warrior
# 3523
|
Posted
TMI ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) ![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif)
--------------------
Fancy a break beside the sea in Suffolk? Visit my website
Posts: 4413 | From: Suffolk UK | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ToujoursDan
Ship's prole
# 10578
|
Posted
Well, the mechanics of all sex is TMI. The vagina isn't exactly always odour free and clean. They have commercials about these things.
--------------------
"Many people say I embarrass them with my humility" - Archbishop Peter Akinola
Facebook link: http://www.facebook.com/toujoursdan
Posts: 3734 | From: NYC | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ToujoursDan:
Well, the mechanics of all sex is TMI. The vagina isn't exactly always odour free and clean. They have commercials about these things.
Not if you go to bed before 9.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
quote:
Going back to the "ick factor" for a moment, I'm not sure it's as constant as it's portrayed to be. Given what I understand about the consumer demographics of lesbian-themed pornography, and that yaoi is marketed almost exclusively to straight women, a positive reaction to homosexuality seems common enough to support several booming businesses.
I think the "ick" factor usually come more in finding homosexual acts by one's own sex icky, rather than finding homosexual acts by the opposite sex icky.
(Just for the record, I don't find either one icky myself.)
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yerevan:
homosexuality isn't much good for perpetuating the species.
Probably a topic that deserves its own thread, but I've occasionally seen discussion in places like New Scientist of research suggesting that homosexuality DOES help perpetuate the species... just because we don't do it directly, doesn't mean we're not helping the breeders out in some way.
Among other things, apparently we make excellent uncles.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jon in the Nati
Shipmate
# 15849
|
Posted
quote:
Among other things, apparently we make excellent uncles.
Of that, I have no doubt... but aunts, though...
--------------------
Homer: Aww, this isn't about Jesus, is it?
Lovejoy: All things are about Jesus, Homer. Except this.
Posts: 773 | From: Region formerly known as the Biretta Belt | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemrw:
quote:
Going back to the "ick factor" for a moment, I'm not sure it's as constant as it's portrayed to be. Given what I understand about the consumer demographics of lesbian-themed pornography, and that yaoi is marketed almost exclusively to straight women, a positive reaction to homosexuality seems common enough to support several booming businesses.
I think the "ick" factor usually come more in finding homosexual acts by one's own sex icky, rather than finding homosexual acts by the opposite sex icky.
(Just for the record, I don't find either one icky myself.)
Interestingly, as a gay man I don't find lesbian sex icky, just utterly incomprehensible. It's almost like some kind of mental blank spot. I'm intellectually aware of the fact that it exists, and that's about it.
Whether this is just me, I don't know. One of my gay friends says he thinks lesbians are cute, but he seems to mean it in much the same way that you'd call a puppy or kitten cute.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ToujoursDan
Ship's prole
# 10578
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Yerevan:
homosexuality isn't much good for perpetuating the species.
Probably a topic that deserves its own thread, but I've occasionally seen discussion in places like New Scientist of research suggesting that homosexuality DOES help perpetuate the species... just because we don't do it directly, doesn't mean we're not helping the breeders out in some way.
Among other things, apparently we make excellent uncles.
I've read this before as well. It takes a village to raise a child and those children who had [childless] aunts and uncles to aid in their development were better socialized, better able to form relationships and have more and healthier children themselves.
[ 05. October 2010, 02:54: Message edited by: ToujoursDan ]
--------------------
"Many people say I embarrass them with my humility" - Archbishop Peter Akinola
Facebook link: http://www.facebook.com/toujoursdan
Posts: 3734 | From: NYC | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
multipara
Shipmate
# 2918
|
Posted
* Ahem*
Toujours Dan, it appears that the sniffing of female bits is outside your area of experience. I suggest that you don't take at face value all those TV ads about smelly vaginas; such ads exist only to sell totally unnecessary products such as the largey discredited douches sprays etc. What can smell is the unwashed perineum because of all the anorecally-derived bacteria which live there and which produce smelly peptides after interacting with urine, faecal smears and otherwise odourless vaginal discharges.
There are of course exceptions to the rule, which one tends to experience in the course of doing a medical examination on some hapless female, such as the case of a missing tampon, a nasty (and not necessarily sexually-acquired) infection or a fistula. At least the first instance is quickly and easily fixed.
Over and out,
m ( eternally grateful that pre-sex prep has never included an enema)
Posts: 4985 | From: new south wales | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by multipara:
* Ahem*
At least there was some warning at the beginning of that post. Well done.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
Wow. I just dropped in here as a tourist - and just look at the place....!
P.S. I know the OP is well-intentioned - but couldn't we get out of the "objectionable (to me) physical acts occurring at most once a week according to studies" mode at some point and talk about...oh, I don't know....love and companionship? Or something?
I mean, I appreciate sex as much as the next babe, but it's over pretty soon - and then what have you got? I think really the debate ought to center around the whole - you know - living thing....
[ 05. October 2010, 14:38: Message edited by: TubaMirum ]
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
I mean, I appreciate sex as much as the next babe, but it's over pretty soon - and then what have you got?
In the case of gay sex, two men who BOTH roll over and immediately fall asleep. ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
iGeek
Number of the Feast
# 777
|
Posted
We're efficient that way.
Posts: 2150 | From: West End, Gulfopolis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
I mean, I appreciate sex as much as the next babe, but it's over pretty soon - and then what have you got? I think really the debate ought to center around the whole - you know - living thing....
Me too - but the intimacy and pleasure of sex frame the living thing, give you a great (and good-for-you) 'high' to look forward to and help you both through the boring/tedious bits. It's a great way of strengthening the bond between partners, don't you think?
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
I mean, I appreciate sex as much as the next babe, but it's over pretty soon - and then what have you got? I think really the debate ought to center around the whole - you know - living thing....
Me too - but the intimacy and pleasure of sex frame the living thing, give you a great (and good-for-you) 'high' to look forward to and help you both through the boring/tedious bits. It's a great way of strengthening the bond between partners, don't you think?
The problem is that you rarely see a post expressly dedicated to the "intimacy and pleasure of sex" between heterosexuals comparing it to "nose-picking" (or some other unappealing habit). IOW, sex is part of heterosexual life, not the whole thing - and it's not routinely described as something "the rest us have to put up with in order to be tolerant."
As I said, I realize the OP was well-intentioned, and really had no intention of doing this. But gay people think our partnerships - and the physical aspect of them - is pretty special and wonderful, just like heterosexuals do. When we're in love with our partners, sex is more than just a little pleasurable physical action.
On another point: while it's true that the view of sex as something purely recreational is very, very recent, I do suspect that people have always found ways to enjoy it "non-procreationally." I remember such things quite well from my teenage years, in fact....
[ 06. October 2010, 13:46: Message edited by: TubaMirum ]
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
(P.S. Lots of gay men don't have anal sex - and of course no lesbians do in the standard sense of the word - so I wish everybody could stop defining "homosexuality" by this means. Please.)
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
I wish everybody could stop defining "homosexuality" by this means. Please.)
Who do you think is doing this?
The point of this thread seems to me to be the extent to which visceral distaste is at the root of moral objection to homosexuality, and if so, whether this makes the objection justifiable*.
Obviously the focus is going to be on such homosexual activities which most provoke visceral distaste**. Anal sex, like it or not, is going to feature. No one is suggesting that this is all there is to being gay. That would be silly.
(*My answers being - 'Not much' and 'no'.)
(**In some people. Not everyone.)
[ 06. October 2010, 15:05: Message edited by: Eliab ]
--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"
Richard Dawkins
Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
I wish everybody could stop defining "homosexuality" by this means. Please.)
Who do you think is doing this?
Everybody does it, all the time. Even when it's the generic "ick" factor that's allegedly under discussion. The talk turned to anal sex on this thread on page 2 and hasn't yet let up. You brought up "buggery," as a matter of fact, and "particular sex acts."
As we all know, there's a huge market in so-called "lesbian sex" that's aimed at men; there's obviously not much "ick factor" going on there. And then there's the whole "lesbian-until-graduation" phenomenon, and the alleged "fluidity" of female sexuality; so how come we always end up talking about anal sex, no matter what?
A priest at General Convention in 2003 stood up and starting started talking about it, for God's sake, to argue why gay people shouldn't be consecrated Bishop!
So this is really the issue, and I simply wish that "anal sex" would be the headline, instead of "homosexuality," if that's what we're going to be talking about.
But, I guess I'm fairly well resigned to listening to discussions about "anal sex and homosexuality" forever, even though it literally has nothing to do with me....
[ 06. October 2010, 15:51: Message edited by: TubaMirum ]
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142
|
Posted
The sexual fluidity of lesbians is pretty well researched and documented now, so I think it's moved beyond being alleged?
You're right that the porn market for 'lesbian' activity is very active, though of course immensely unrepresentative of reality for many of us.
Posts: 5102 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
I mean, I appreciate sex as much as the next babe, but it's over pretty soon - and then what have you got? I think really the debate ought to center around the whole - you know - living thing....
Me too - but the intimacy and pleasure of sex frame the living thing, give you a great (and good-for-you) 'high' to look forward to and help you both through the boring/tedious bits. It's a great way of strengthening the bond between partners, don't you think?
The problem is that you rarely see a post expressly dedicated to the "intimacy and pleasure of sex" between heterosexuals comparing it to "nose-picking" (or some other unappealing habit). IOW, sex is part of heterosexual life, not the whole thing - and it's not routinely described as something "the rest us have to put up with in order to be tolerant."
As I said, I realize the OP was well-intentioned, and really had no intention of doing this. But gay people think our partnerships - and the physical aspect of them - is pretty special and wonderful, just like heterosexuals do. When we're in love with our partners, sex is more than just a little pleasurable physical action.
I agree 100% and my comment, which you quoted above, applies equally to homosexul and heterosexual people.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
Everybody does it, all the time.
No one has done it on this thread.
quote:
You brought up "buggery," as a matter of fact,
Sure - in response to a reference to "the homosexual act", which I took to be a circumlocution for the same.
(And not because I imagined CA to be saying that anal sex is the only homosexual act worth talking about - any more than I would take a reference to "the conjugal act" to mean that penis/vagina interaction were the be all and end all of marriage - but because that is the act most likely to be euphemised).
quote:
and "particular sex acts."
Yes, and to make almost exactly the opposite point to the one you infer.
The reference was not especially to anal sex, but to those particular sex acts which are unfamiliar to any given person. My point was that it is not a fault to feel distaste for such things (provided that one acts fairly and charitably notwithstanding one's distaste).
An example of that would be a person with no inclination to anal sex finding the idea of using that for sexual pleasure highly uncomfortable - but the point I was making is that this is of general application. Any intimate biological process which desire has not made appealing or familiarity made mundane is potentially a cause of disgust. That just seems to be the way that (lots of) people are made. Feeling that way does not (in the case of homosexual activity) make one homophobic - which was the allegation I was refuting. Many children, learning about ‘straight' sex for the first time, think the idea is disgusting (I did). They usually get over it. Morally, that sort of distaste is of no significance whatever.
--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"
Richard Dawkins
Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ToujoursDan
Ship's prole
# 10578
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
I wish everybody could stop defining "homosexuality" by this means. Please.)
Who do you think is doing this?
Everybody does it, all the time. Even when it's the generic "ick" factor that's allegedly under discussion. The talk turned to anal sex on this thread on page 2 and hasn't yet let up. You brought up "buggery," as a matter of fact, and "particular sex acts."
As we all know, there's a huge market in so-called "lesbian sex" that's aimed at men; there's obviously not much "ick factor" going on there. And then there's the whole "lesbian-until-graduation" phenomenon, and the alleged "fluidity" of female sexuality; so how come we always end up talking about anal sex, no matter what?
A priest at General Convention in 2003 stood up and starting started talking about it, for God's sake, to argue why gay people shouldn't be consecrated Bishop!
So this is really the issue, and I simply wish that "anal sex" would be the headline, instead of "homosexuality," if that's what we're going to be talking about.
But, I guess I'm fairly well resigned to listening to discussions about "anal sex and homosexuality" forever, even though it literally has nothing to do with me....
I'm also gay so completely understand your frustration here. But the ugly truth is that the church has been obsessed with where people put their bits for a long time. The Church Fathers railed against non-procreative sexual acts no matter how loving and faithful the couple was.
You can love someone until death do you part, but if you're "spilling the seed" you're sinning according to many Christians. I agree that it's a misplaced priority (especially now when science has revealed that men produce as much seed as needed) but it's always been there.
--------------------
"Many people say I embarrass them with my humility" - Archbishop Peter Akinola
Facebook link: http://www.facebook.com/toujoursdan
Posts: 3734 | From: NYC | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
The sexual fluidity of lesbians is pretty well researched and documented now, so I think it's moved beyond being alleged?
You're right that the porn market for 'lesbian' activity is very active, though of course immensely unrepresentative of reality for many of us.
Actually, I didn't say "lesbians" - I said "women." I'd be interested in seeing some research and documentation, though, for the former.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
Everybody does it, all the time.
No one has done it on this thread.
quote:
You brought up "buggery," as a matter of fact,
Sure - in response to a reference to "the homosexual act", which I took to be a circumlocution for the same.
And Q.E.D.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ToujoursDan:
I'm also gay so completely understand your frustration here. But the ugly truth is that the church has been obsessed with where people put their bits for a long time. The Church Fathers railed against non-procreative sexual acts no matter how loving and faithful the couple was.
You can love someone until death do you part, but if you're "spilling the seed" you're sinning according to many Christians. I agree that it's a misplaced priority (especially now when science has revealed that men produce as much seed as needed) but it's always been there.
You know, I really don't think "spilling the seed" has anything to do with it. As we know, 90% or more of Catholics worldwide use birth control (just as 75% of statistics you see on the internet are invented on the spot - but it really is some very high percentage!). And Protestants have been using BC for a long time now.
For some people, it's really that homosexuality seems "unnatural." As a matter of fact, I remember having a conversation about the "unnatural" thing with a young gay guy about 20 years ago, while we were looking at an image of two men (or maybe two women, I don't remember) kissing. That was all they were doing - and he said that even he had a hard time getting over the idea that it was "unnatural."
This was because it was taboo - forbidden. Images like this were shocking to people who'd never seen them before - even gay people! In fact, I remember hearing a woman literally scream at the kiss between Tom What's-His_name and Kevin Kline in the movie "In and Out." Literally, she screamed. This was in a suburban movie theater in New Jersey - hardly the most backwards place in the world.
This has been deep in all our psyches for a long, long time - and as somebody recently said, taboo is something people don't get over in 5 minutes. It takes a long time - and actually the rate at which homosexuality has become accepted in the West is pretty stunning, to me. But the physical thing is going to take longer.
And we'll always still be talking about anal sex, I'm completely sure. Willingly or unwillingly....
[ 06. October 2010, 16:55: Message edited by: TubaMirum ]
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ToujoursDan
Ship's prole
# 10578
|
Posted
Ahhh well. Now that that The A List is on TV everyone will learn that gay people can be every be as vacuous and boring as everyone else. There's no way we'll overthrow the social order.
--------------------
"Many people say I embarrass them with my humility" - Archbishop Peter Akinola
Facebook link: http://www.facebook.com/toujoursdan
Posts: 3734 | From: NYC | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ToujoursDan:
Ahhh well. Now that that The A List is on TV everyone will learn that gay people can be every be as vacuous and boring as everyone else. There's no way we'll overthrow the social order.
Good thinking! So maybe the question next time will be, instead: "If homosexuality is a sin, is it on a par with the 'sin' of forcing one's tedious manner of living on others through the scandal of Reality TV?"
I wanted to add that I think you had a good point above that the "man is offending gender roles by choosing the "female" role of receptor." But I'm not sure that "ick" factors into this, except if we're talking about anal sex (which we always are, of course).
There might a non-ick parallel with nose-picking, though - that is, that it's Simply Unacceptable Behavior in Our Society, ick or no ick. (Not sure, once again, that there's a lesbian counterpart, though. Men seem to have tighter strait-jackets all around....)
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
You brought up "buggery," as a matter of fact,
Sure - in response to a reference to "the homosexual act", which I took to be a circumlocution for the same.
And Q.E.D.
All that demonstrates is the role of euphemism.
Phrases which might be in the same register as “the homosexual act” would include:
“The act of love” for sex. Doesn’t mean that all sex is loving or that all love is sexual.
“Conjugal rights” for sex. Doesn’t mean that spouses necessarily think of sex in terms of rights and obligations, or that there are not other sorts of rights in marriage.
“Marital aids” for sex toys. Doesn’t mean that single people don’t buy vibrators, or that some fur-lined handcuffs will always be the best thing to assist a struggling relationship.
“Solitary vice” for masturbation. Doesn’t mean that wanking is the only misdemeanour that you can engage in while alone. On that it has to be either vicious or solitary.
Similarly, a shaded reference to anal sex as “the homosexual act” doesn’t mean that all gays do it and that’s all gays do. Read it as you would any other euphemism.
--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"
Richard Dawkins
Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
You brought up "buggery," as a matter of fact,
Sure - in response to a reference to "the homosexual act", which I took to be a circumlocution for the same.
And Q.E.D.
All that demonstrates is the role of euphemism.
Phrases which might be in the same register as “the homosexual act” would include:
“The act of love” for sex. Doesn’t mean that all sex is loving or that all love is sexual.
“Conjugal rights” for sex. Doesn’t mean that spouses necessarily think of sex in terms of rights and obligations, or that there are not other sorts of rights in marriage.
“Marital aids” for sex toys. Doesn’t mean that single people don’t buy vibrators, or that some fur-lined handcuffs will always be the best thing to assist a struggling relationship.
“Solitary vice” for masturbation. Doesn’t mean that wanking is the only misdemeanour that you can engage in while alone. On that it has to be either vicious or solitary.
Similarly, a shaded reference to anal sex as “the homosexual act” doesn’t mean that all gays do it and that’s all gays do. Read it as you would any other euphemism.
I think you're missing the point, Eliab. Which is that a reference to "the homosexual act" immediately conjures up the image of anal sex - which is exactly what I claimed above.
I mean, surely you realize that the post could have been referring to other "acts," right? Here's the original statement:
quote:
I'm a recovering homophobe, but the homosexual act is still as "disgusting" to me as nose-picking is.
Now, there's no clue at all here what the poster was talking about - yet immediately the words "the homosexual act" heads off into "anal sex" territory. You think that's what he's referring to - but of course, he hasn't said so. Perhaps he actually was referring to "the homosexual act" - that is, male/male and female/female sexual behavior - in general.
But of course, that's NOT what's at issue here. So why doesn't the original post read: "Anal sex disgusts me, but then so does nose-picking," thus actually addressing the real issue, rather than making it allegedly about "homosexuality"?
IOW, this is an argument about penis-in-anus, rather than about "homosexuality" per se. So why can't we just have that discussion, and leave homosexuals in general out of it?
As a matter of fact, many of us have been making this very point for years and years now, in re the "Biblical prohibition of homosexuality." Because actually the Bible addresses this question in specific, too, as we lesbians (who aren't mentioned in Leviticus, although many Evangelicals continue to prefer to "read us in" to the prohibition there - while also claiming to be "inerrantists") have been pointing out for many years.
Interestingly, when you point out this simple fact - that the condemnation against "homosexuality" isn't really there, only a discussion of male/male sex of some kind - some Christians get very insulted and start saying things like "Well, if God had only meant to condemn male homosexuality, then that is a double-minded God I wouldn't want to worship." To which I respond: "Right! So maybe the original premise is wrong then?"
Sheesh. Let's get on with it, already.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Christian Agnostic
Shipmate
# 14912
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
quote:
I'm a recovering homophobe, but the homosexual act is still as "disgusting" to me as nose-picking is.
Now, there's no clue at all here what the poster was talking about - yet immediately the words "the homosexual act" heads off into "anal sex" territory. You think that's what he's referring to - but of course, he hasn't said so.
I guess I need to chime in here. I find human shit particularly disgusting, and I've changed more than a few diapers in my lifetime and I still find human feces "icky", maybe this is just a phobia. I see now that I've made unwise word choices (and how ) I'm a "breeder" (as my gay friend calls me) but have never been turned on by hetero anal sex. Sorry about all the fuss I started. ![[Waterworks]](graemlins/bawling.gif) I was trying to point out "ickiness" isn't a sin, and neither is homosexuality.
--------------------
Words to the wise: Don't read Kierkegaard when you're 16, and always set B.S. detectors to 11. "How can I sing a strange song in the Lord's land?"
Posts: 493 | From: The Great North Woods | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Christian Agnostic:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
quote:
I'm a recovering homophobe, but the homosexual act is still as "disgusting" to me as nose-picking is.
Now, there's no clue at all here what the poster was talking about - yet immediately the words "the homosexual act" heads off into "anal sex" territory. You think that's what he's referring to - but of course, he hasn't said so.
I guess I need to chime in here. I find human shit particularly disgusting, and I've changed more than a few diapers in my lifetime and I still find human feces "icky", maybe this is just a phobia. I see now that I've made unwise word choices (and how ) I'm a "breeder" (as my gay friend calls me) but have never been turned on by hetero anal sex. Sorry about all the fuss I started. I was trying to point out "ickiness" isn't a sin, and neither is homosexuality.
Actually I'm grateful to you, Christian Agnostic. What I'm saying here is not said in anger at all; I'm just being a drama queen for rhetorical effect. This post helps me point out once again the logical problems with the church's "anti-homosexual" stand, and the fact that I believe that the few Biblical verses allegedly addressing the topic are actually not saying what everybody claims they are.
I know you didn't mean to be mean, and actually I admire your honesty. I'm just pointing out certain things here that I don't think are being acknowledged, that's all.
Please don't cry! All is well, really.... ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
I mean, I appreciate sex as much as the next babe, but it's over pretty soon - and then what have you got?
In the case of gay sex, two men who BOTH roll over and immediately fall asleep.
I meant to say, Orfeo, that this is quite funny!
Before I got distracted by the whole "dislike-for-anal-sex-masquerading-as-condemnation-of-'homosexuality'" thing, that is....
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
The sexual fluidity of lesbians is pretty well researched and documented now, so I think it's moved beyond being alleged?
You're right that the porn market for 'lesbian' activity is very active, though of course immensely unrepresentative of reality for many of us.
Actually, I didn't say "lesbians" - I said "women." I'd be interested in seeing some research and documentation, though, for the former.
Sexual Fluidity by Lisa Diamond can be previewed on Google Books and is a fairly good bit of research, thought and review on this topic of the sexual fluidity of women.
Posts: 5102 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
Sexual Fluidity by Lisa Diamond can be previewed on Google Books and is a fairly good bit of research, thought and review on this topic of the sexual fluidity of women.
Wow that is very interesting reading! (What I could read with the way it's set up on Amazon, with pages missing here and there.)
I had no idea. I may have to read that.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
The sexual fluidity of lesbians is pretty well researched and documented now, so I think it's moved beyond being alleged?
You're right that the porn market for 'lesbian' activity is very active, though of course immensely unrepresentative of reality for many of us.
Actually, I didn't say "lesbians" - I said "women." I'd be interested in seeing some research and documentation, though, for the former.
Sexual Fluidity by Lisa Diamond can be previewed on Google Books and is a fairly good bit of research, thought and review on this topic of the sexual fluidity of women.
Thanks. The reason I asked is that you don't see much in the way of scientific studies with lesbians in specific as subjects. I wonder, actually, if lesbians are as "sexually fluid" as some other women; given all the problems involved in living a gay life, it would seem to me that if they were, they'd flow over the heterosexual side of things.
On the other hand, in my life I've been somewhat "fluid" myself sexually - but not emotionally. I never have feelings for men, ever - except in a "brotherly" sort of way - and have never had a serious relationship with a man. I'd be really curious in seeing a study that looked at emotional "fluidity," if there's such a thing.
Thanks again for the link.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Timothy the Obscure
Mostly Friendly
# 292
|
Posted
James Weinrich does address that in Sexual Landscapes. It's been a while since I read it, so I won't try to summarize, but he goes into the differences in the ways men and women connect sex with emotion.
--------------------
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion.
- C. P. Snow
Posts: 6114 | From: PDX | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Timothy the Obscure:
James Weinrich does address that in Sexual Landscapes. It's been a while since I read it, so I won't try to summarize, but he goes into the differences in the ways men and women connect sex with emotion.
Yes, that's exactly what I'm interested in! Thanks a lot.....
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
