homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | Register | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Special interest discussion   » Dead Horses   » Biblical interpretation of apparently anti-gay passages (Page 16)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  13  14  15  16  17 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Biblical interpretation of apparently anti-gay passages
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That's quite a laundry list, Aijalon. It seems more like a list of everything Aijalon hates about sex and society rather than having anything to do with homosexuality, except perhaps tangentially.

Let's break it down.

quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
It's a case of massive gender role confusion until what happens is men stop understanding women or appreciating them, they can only understand men, and vis/v, women understand women better than they do men, so they fall for women. In other words, they feel like they "belong" with each other.

I rather think that the stereotype is that gay men are better at understanding and appreciating women - it's the straight men who are the Martians. Conversely, there are plenty of straight men who neither understand nor appreciate women; just enjoy having sex with them.
As LC points out, this seems to be one of those 'can't win for losing' situations. Gay men are too macho, except when they're too effeminate! And lesbians are too girly and need to butch up if they're ever going to be able to relate to men. [Confused]

Quite honestly I'm not sure that forcing men and women to perform tightly scripted gender roles (sorry sweet cheeks, but you're a girl so you can't play sports / real men don't know how to prepare their own food) counts as "appreciating" women/men. It's more like appreciating your own expectations and prejudices.

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
It is facilitated by already heighten sexuality early in teen or pre teen years where sexual exploration without commitment has already lead to disappointing experiences, and sexual disillusionment. This leads to a new search for sexual meaning, and the a fore mentioned loss of connection to the opposite sex creates a default to seek meaning sexually with the same sex - it's easier.

It's statements like that which make people suspect a lot of anti-gay folks are really just a bunch of miserable closet cases. (Not making this determination specifically in regards to Aijalon, just that this same meme keeps popping up too hilariously frequently to be dismissed outright) The premise here seems to be that straight sex is "disappointing" and leads to "disillusionment", whereas gay sex is so totally awesome (first time and every time!) that once you've tried it you'll never be happy with anything else.

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
...divorce, single parent, absent parent issues, creating latent gender based stress in kids.

Is there any evidence that children of divorced parents or single parents are more likely to be gay than children of still-married parents?

Fun fact: so-called "broken homes" are not a new phenomenon in the United States. They were just as common in 1900 as they were in 2000. The major difference is that the most common reason for a missing parent in 1900 was death.

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
...the naturalism in education that we're merely apes acting on impulses....

Apparently no one was gay before 1859.

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
...encouragement of a lot of open sexuality in kids under the guise of safety at school...

I'm not really sure what to make of this. It seems like advocacy of bullying and shaming to enforce gender stereotypes and conformity, but that seems so deliberately cruel I have trouble accepting the suggestion as serious. Explanation?

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
...stressing gender equality when what is in fact meant is equivalency...

Giving women the vote and letting them have jobs outside the home turned them all into lesbians! Better roll that back, because morals.

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
...the general cheapness of sexual experiences in high school and college among kids learning to have sex first and find love later

So much better in the past, when college (or even high school) wasn't an option for most kids. I'm pretty sure that curtailing education would do nothing to change sexual orientation. This seems to be a riff on your earlier assertion that heterosexual sex is almost always disappointing and disillusioning.

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
...the cheapness of birth control as tied to the cheapness of sex.

Because the one thing same-sex couples worry about most is affordable contraception? [Roll Eyes]

Do you need an explanation about certain facts about reproductive biology?

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
...child sexual abuse

Despite the common libel about this, gay people are no more likely to have been sexually abused as children than straight people. Physical abuse, on the other hand, by parents trying to beat the gay out of them . . .

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
The list could go on.

I'm sure it could. For example, you left out the one about fluoridated water and how those kids won't keep off your lawn.

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
Society is manufacturing gay kids.

Yes it is. It is also manufacturing straight kids, and from what we can tell it's doing so in more or less the same proportion that it always has. The big difference is that gay kids no longer feel the need to live lives of secrecy and shame to cater to the prejudices of people like you.

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
Now of course I cannot stop the sexual revolution that started in what, the 60's....

Oh, well before that. Reliable, modern contraceptives predate the 60s by several decades. Plus traditional marriage was destroyed in the nineteenth century when things like coverture laws were abolished. Having the wife considered an equal to her husband in the eyes of the law rather than an obvious subordinate? That was a very revolutionary development.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10484 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
Plus traditional marriage was destroyed in the nineteenth century when things like coverture laws were abolished. Having the wife considered an equal to her husband in the eyes of the law rather than an obvious subordinate? That was a very revolutionary development.

The real breakdown of the family began with the industrial revolution, where the parents were away from the family all day slaving over a hot sewing machine (or some other piece of machinery) and the kids were left to run wild, or warehoused in John Dewey schools all day. Especially single-sex boarding schools. We KNOW what happened in those. There's a set-up for homosexuality like no other.

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
...child sexual abuse

The vast majority of child sexual abuse is straight dads raping their adolescent daughters. Maybe what Aijalon means is that these daughters then swear off having anything to do with men, and become de facto Lesbians. So, yeah, maybe he has a point on this one. [Roll Eyes]

--------------------
“Religion doesn't fuck up people, people fuck up religion.”—lilBuddha

Posts: 63201 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
The real breakdown of the family began with the industrial revolution, where the parents were away from the family all day slaving over a hot sewing machine (or some other piece of machinery) and the kids were left to run wild, or warehoused in John Dewey schools all day. Especially single-sex boarding schools. We KNOW what happened in those. There's a set-up for homosexuality like no other.

Or the kids were working jobs themselves.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10484 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
The real breakdown of the family began with the industrial revolution, where the parents were away from the family all day slaving over a hot sewing machine (or some other piece of machinery) and the kids were left to run wild, or warehoused in John Dewey schools all day. Especially single-sex boarding schools. We KNOW what happened in those. There's a set-up for homosexuality like no other.

Or the kids were working jobs themselves.
Good call.

--------------------
“Religion doesn't fuck up people, people fuck up religion.”—lilBuddha

Posts: 63201 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think we should thank Aijalon for the purest screed of unaduterated evidence free utter bullshit I've seen in years.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17699 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I think we should thank Aijalon for the purest screed of unaduterated evidence free utter bullshit I've seen in years.

What need have we of unadulterated, evidence-free utter bullshit, though? I'd rather have a doughnut.

--------------------
“Religion doesn't fuck up people, people fuck up religion.”—lilBuddha

Posts: 63201 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815

 - Posted      Profile for Gee D     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

The vast majority of child sexual abuse is straight dads raping their adolescent daughters. Maybe what Aijalon means is that these daughters then swear off having anything to do with men, and become de facto Lesbians. So, yeah, maybe he has a point on this one. [Roll Eyes]

I don't know about US statistics. Going from the daily law reports, I'd say that offenders here are more likely to be a subsequent partner of the mother, or a member of the extended family rather than the natural father. That applies to boys as well. Not as much non-familial abuse of girls than of boys, but even there, familial is more common.

It's hard to know what to do with the remainder of Aijalon's post though. It's a farrago of invention, tenth-truths (not even half ones) and lies.

--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican

Posts: 6770 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
I don't know about US statistics. Going from the daily law reports, I'd say that offenders here are more likely to be a subsequent partner of the mother, or a member of the extended family rather than the natural father.

You're right, probably "male parental figure" is more accurate.

--------------------
“Religion doesn't fuck up people, people fuck up religion.”—lilBuddha

Posts: 63201 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815

 - Posted      Profile for Gee D     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I know only 1man who says he was abused - who knows how many were but don't say? The man I know was abused by a much admired older relative and he knew that he would not be believed were he to say anything. Indeed he waited until 10 years after the relative had died before he opened up.

I can understand that sort of delay. What I find more difficult to understand in silence when there's not that sort of reason for it - difficult to understand but it happens in so many instances.

--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican

Posts: 6770 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I think we should thank Aijalon for the purest screed of unaduterated evidence free utter bullshit I've seen in years.

What need have we of unadulterated, evidence-free utter bullshit, though? I'd rather have a doughnut.
Well, yes, but I don't know, it passes the time.
Posts: 17699 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Wah HOO! The homophobia I've been reading in to the New Testament all these years, at first ... like for forty years ... with full agreement and then recently as a helpless aberration of the writers' enculturation, isn't there.

As I enthused on: "WOW! 20 minutes in. And Steve's case has legs. And at 29. He DOES make a case, the case that the context is entirely about exploitative sex.

Amen Steve! Case made. The trajectory is there from the beginning. I accept that universal homophobia is NOT explicit in the New Testament at all, far from it. The question of what Paul and the man Jesus actually thought - if anything at all - about full non-heterosexual bonding is still moot."

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16988 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881

 - Posted      Profile for Soror Magna   Email Soror Magna   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
... It is facilitated by already heighten sexuality early in teen or pre teen years where sexual exploration without commitment has already lead to disappointing experiences, and sexual disillusionment. ...

Well, that's not how I remember it. [Big Grin]

Anyway, according to Aijalon, opposite-sex sex without commitment is disappointing, but gay sex - presumably with or without commitment - is fucking awesome! Don't let the kids find out! Where does that notion come from?

--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"

Posts: 5394 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
... It is facilitated by already heighten sexuality early in teen or pre teen years where sexual exploration without commitment has already lead to disappointing experiences, and sexual disillusionment. ...

Well, that's not how I remember it. [Big Grin]

Anyway, according to Aijalon, opposite-sex sex without commitment is disappointing, but gay sex - presumably with or without commitment - is fucking awesome! Don't let the kids find out! Where does that notion come from?

Well, according to Aijalon, sex is all about using someone else to please yourself. One would think that "any port in a storm" would apply here. But apparently there is something about having sex with a man that I am missing, something magical and special that would make my twenty years of marital rumpy pumpy seem like weak tea.

Unless some gay guys come forward (get it?) and tell us, though, we straight guys will never know what that secret ingredient is. And I believe they are sworn to secrecy as part of the Gay Agenda™.

--------------------
“Religion doesn't fuck up people, people fuck up religion.”—lilBuddha

Posts: 63201 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

Unless some gay guys come forward (get it?) and tell us, though, we straight guys will never know what that secret ingredient is. And I believe they are sworn to secrecy as part of the Gay Agenda™.

[Confused] I thought the Gay Agenda™ was to turn all the straights. I don't know for certain what the key ingredient for men is, but I thought it had something to do with EDM and being overly-concerned about fashion.

Example:
Man: "Do I have the right clothing for the rave? OMG! I suddenly crave penis"

[ 22. July 2017, 17:54: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17087 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

Unless some gay guys come forward (get it?) and tell us, though, we straight guys will never know what that secret ingredient is. And I believe they are sworn to secrecy as part of the Gay Agenda™.

[Confused] I thought the Gay Agenda™ was to turn all the straights.
That's the Gay Goal™ aka the Gay Endgame™ (get it?). The Gay Agenda™ specifies the steps to get to that goal.

ETA:

quote:
Example:
Man: "Do I have the right clothing for the rave? OMG! I suddenly crave penis"

This is very funny. [Killing me] [Overused]

[ 22. July 2017, 19:17: Message edited by: mousethief ]

--------------------
“Religion doesn't fuck up people, people fuck up religion.”—lilBuddha

Posts: 63201 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
ThunderBunk

Stone cold idiot
# 15579

 - Posted      Profile for ThunderBunk   Email ThunderBunk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

Unless some gay guys come forward (get it?) and tell us, though, we straight guys will never know what that secret ingredient is. And I believe they are sworn to secrecy as part of the Gay Agenda™.

[Confused] I thought the Gay Agenda™ was to turn all the straights.
That's the Gay Goal™ aka the Gay Endgame™ (get it?). The Gay Agenda™ specifies the steps to get to that goal.

ETA:

quote:
Example:
Man: "Do I have the right clothing for the rave? OMG! I suddenly crave penis"

This is very funny. [Killing me] [Overused]

Curses. We've been outed all over again.

Have to find another way of taking over the world, one phallus at a time.

--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".

Foolish, potentially deranged witterings

Posts: 2147 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
Have to find another way of taking over the world, one phallus at a time.

You guys are a bunch of pricks.

--------------------
“Religion doesn't fuck up people, people fuck up religion.”—lilBuddha

Posts: 63201 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Aijalon
Shipmate
# 18777

 - Posted      Profile for Aijalon   Email Aijalon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:

It's a case of massive gender role confusion until what happens is men stop understanding women or appreciating them,

I rather think that the stereotype is that gay men are better at understanding and appreciating women - it's the straight men who are the Martians. Conversely, there are plenty of straight men who neither understand nor appreciate women; just enjoy having sex with them.
I think that the issue with women understanding gay men "better" is that they simply have the boundary of a sexual relationship off the table. So they are more free to connect. It isn't that the gay men are so much more capable of understanding women.

Now in saying all that, you realize of course that the "mechanism" I'm talking here is just a very hazy and brief explanation of an overall unwritten theory. I felt I owed at least something of response to the request. As the theory would require a quite intricate study of very young kids which doesn't exist, my theory must of course fly in the face of science and all the so called "proof" that homosexuality is harmless to society.

I'm really just saying that, as long as two parents raise their kids in a traditional sense, homosexuality never enters the equation as it isn't a natural phenomenon in that scenario. It wouldn't even be a concept that would enter the mind, to them it would be an unknown concept.

[ 24. July 2017, 03:27: Message edited by: Aijalon ]

--------------------
God gave you free will so you could give it back.

Posts: 200 | From: Kansas City | Registered: May 2017  |  IP: Logged
Aijalon
Shipmate
# 18777

 - Posted      Profile for Aijalon   Email Aijalon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

That gay people are oversexed and can't find someone of the opposite sex who will have sex with them, so they have to be gay?

So obsessed that regular, vanilla sex isn't enough! Something more must be added and then more and more depraved! I forget the order, though. I think it is something like promiscuity, then kink, then homosexuality and then animals and or children? My copy of the handbook is a bit dog-eared and stained, so it is difficult to read. I did as for a new one, but since the drive to convert has been stepped up, they are in short supply.
I haven't been though all the steps, myself. No desire for children or animals. Does this mean that I am salvageable or merely that the devil hasn't gotten round yet?

So if someone with a biological urge for sex (and some are wired stronger I guess) has that urge go unfulfilled, I'd say that they may explore more and more ways to get fulfilled, so there is something about the vanilla sex thing that holds true.

But again as I said the main issue really isn't kink, that is fuel for the fire, the main thing is the total obscurity of the value in gender roles. Rather, gender roles are regarded as devaluing. I rather say that gender roles when followed in true love, are actually the perfect thing.

The whole thing is the issue of finding love and fulfillment. But unfortunately, sex has become the pathway to finding that, whereas it should not be. Selflessness in the sense of Christ is the thing which takes you on the path to love. It's all a giant problem of confusing sex and love.

Once you feel unloved, and use sex to fill the void, BOOM. So yeah, promiscuity is part, kink is part, but the love factor is the main thing, that's the driving force. I guess even failing to get love from Mum and Daddy isn't the real thing, if people were educated about what love is, and that sex isn't the way to find it, mum and dad could die and the kid would not search for love all the wrong ways, as hurt as they may be with no parents.

--------------------
God gave you free will so you could give it back.

Posts: 200 | From: Kansas City | Registered: May 2017  |  IP: Logged
Aijalon
Shipmate
# 18777

 - Posted      Profile for Aijalon   Email Aijalon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Aijalon,

In the Styx I advised that you post in a manner that brings light with minimum heat. Your most recent post is a prime example of the exact opposite.

You propose a mechanism, without any supporting evidence for it, that effectively states that LGBT people are the product of teenage sexual experience, that they were slutty teenagers.

Your post adds no light, since there's nothing there of substance to discuss. But, the personal attack on LGBT people creates a lot of heat.

You now have a concrete example of what the Hosts here have been warning you of. A last chance to rethink how you express your views, and learn how to do so without needless offense. The next example will result in a suspension from these boards.

Alan
Ship of Fools Admin

Hello Allan.

I am just now reading this.

I don't think it is possible to continue the conversation and not have "heat" so I will stop posting on this topic.

--------------------
God gave you free will so you could give it back.

Posts: 200 | From: Kansas City | Registered: May 2017  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:

Once you feel unloved, and use sex to fill the void, BOOM. ing force. I guess even failing to get love from Mum and Daddy isn't the real thing, if people were educated about what love is, and that sex isn't the way to find it, mum and dad could die and the kid would not search for love all the wrong ways, as hurt as they may be with no parents.

OK, so some people do use sex to fill a void. How do you explain that most LGBT+ have normal homes before they come out? And that those who have supportive families after they come out don't suddenly become straight? Or that most abused children do not "turn gay"?

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17087 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
I'm really just saying that, as long as two parents raise their kids in a traditional sense, homosexuality never enters the equation as it isn't a natural phenomenon in that scenario. It wouldn't even be a concept that would enter the mind, to them it would be an unknown concept.

Baloney. Plenty of people raised their kids like this, and nonetheless some of those kids were homosexual.
Posts: 24428 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:

The whole thing is the issue of finding love and fulfillment. But unfortunately, sex has become the pathway to finding that, whereas it should not be. Selflessness in the sense of Christ is the thing which takes you on the path to love. It's all a giant problem of confusing sex and love.

So it sounds like what you're saying here is that at least some straight couples fall in love, and then go on to have satisfying marital sex, whereas all gay couples fall in lust, and grow close whilst satisfying their animal urges.

Is that an accurate characterization of what you're saying? 'cause I have to tell you, I know some gay couples who fell in what I would describe as selfless, Christ-like love, just like you're describing as the ideal for straight couples. It's just that they're two guys. I hope and expect that they're enjoying regular satisfying sex, but I know them well enough to know that sex had nothing to do with their falling in love.

Basically, I don't recognize your caricature as describing many of the gay couples I know - and certainly not all of them. And that's the problem I have with your arguments in this thread - they all seem to end up at this imaginary picture of what homosexuality is and what gay people do that bears no relation to the reality that I see. Which means that you build your arguments on sand, and the tide is coming in.

Posts: 4893 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
I'm really just saying that, as long as two parents raise their kids in a traditional sense, homosexuality never enters the equation as it isn't a natural phenomenon in that scenario. It wouldn't even be a concept that would enter the mind, to them it would be an unknown concept.

But history shows this is bunk.

--------------------
“Religion doesn't fuck up people, people fuck up religion.”—lilBuddha

Posts: 63201 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815

 - Posted      Profile for Gee D     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:

I'm really just saying that, as long as two parents raise their kids in a traditional sense, homosexuality never enters the equation as it isn't a natural phenomenon in that scenario. It wouldn't even be a concept that would enter the mind, to them it would be an unknown concept.

So how who you explain the family of one of my sisters? 4 children, with 2 married and with children, i still unmarried but has had several long-term relationships with girls, and one gay. All in the same environment, all with the same upbringing - and around here that's a pretty traditional one.

[ 24. July 2017, 06:51: Message edited by: Gee D ]

--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican

Posts: 6770 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:


I'm really just saying that, as long as two parents raise their kids in a traditional sense, homosexuality never enters the equation as it isn't a natural phenomenon in that scenario. It wouldn't even be a concept that would enter the mind, to them it would be an unknown concept.

Children grow up and then they go out into the world and meet and engage with various people and ideas. That's called adulthood.

There is nothing a parent can do whilst they are a child which will prevent them from coming into contact as an adult with an idea you don't like.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10314 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And are all of those children who knew they were non-heterosexual years before puberty, just as I knew I was heterosexual - whatever that was, as I had no idea about sex until I read Ian Fleming at age 12 - by whom I was falling in love with from aged 7, making it up?

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16988 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
It's a case of massive gender role confusion until what happens is men stop understanding women or appreciating them,

I rather think that the stereotype is that gay men are better at understanding and appreciating women - it's the straight men who are the Martians. Conversely, there are plenty of straight men who neither understand nor appreciate women; just enjoy having sex with them.
I think that the issue with women understanding gay men "better" is that they simply have the boundary of a sexual relationship off the table. So they are more free to connect. It isn't that the gay men are so much more capable of understanding women.
So gay men can't connect with or understand women, which is why they connect so well with women? Wow, that's some extra-special rationalization there.

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
Now in saying all that, you realize of course that the "mechanism" I'm talking here is just a very hazy and brief explanation of an overall unwritten theory.

I believe this is referred to as an argumentum ad rectum. Your "mechanism", by your own admission, is indistinguishable from 'just making shit up'.

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
I'm really just saying that, as long as two parents raise their kids in a traditional sense, homosexuality never enters the equation as it isn't a natural phenomenon in that scenario. It wouldn't even be a concept that would enter the mind, to them it would be an unknown concept.

quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
The whole thing is the issue of finding love and fulfillment. But unfortunately, sex has become the pathway to finding that, whereas it should not be. Selflessness in the sense of Christ is the thing which takes you on the path to love. It's all a giant problem of confusing sex and love.

I'm pretty sure that if an opposite-sex couple is in a sexless relationship of the sort you claim is the only true path to fulfillment raising kids is going to be a non-issue.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10484 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Aijalon
Shipmate
# 18777

 - Posted      Profile for Aijalon   Email Aijalon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:

The whole thing is the issue of finding love and fulfillment. But unfortunately, sex has become the pathway to finding that, whereas it should not be. Selflessness in the sense of Christ is the thing which takes you on the path to love. It's all a giant problem of confusing sex and love.

So it sounds like what you're saying here is that at least some straight couples fall in love, and then go on to have satisfying marital sex, whereas all gay couples fall in lust, and grow close whilst satisfying their animal urges.

Is that an accurate characterization of what you're saying? 'cause I have to tell you, I know some gay couples who fell in what I would describe as selfless, Christ-like love, just like you're describing as the ideal for straight couples. It's just that they're two guys. I hope and expect that they're enjoying regular satisfying sex, but I know them well enough to know that sex had nothing to do with their falling in love.

Basically, I don't recognize your caricature as describing many of the gay couples I know - and certainly not all of them. And that's the problem I have with your arguments in this thread - they all seem to end up at this imaginary picture of what homosexuality is and what gay people do that bears no relation to the reality that I see. Which means that you build your arguments on sand, and the tide is coming in.

**I am trying to respond here in serious peril of being banned, but want to respond to you to wrap up in some respect, and if it were possible regain some respect between sides, in some sense, and if possible make this the last post**

I did not say that gay couples cannot love each other. Just as I don't say that straight couples that look to sex to find love cannot love each other. It is possible of course, to find love using sex. I'm saying that the pattern of looking to sex first to find love is one of the causes of homosexuality. That's all. Lust is a sexual urge, that's all there is too it. I've consistently compared my lust for the hypothetical neighbor's wife as the same as any homosexual urge.

Nowthen, I suppose that my idea of homosexuality could be tainted by the notion that there are no homosexual "virgins" in the sense that homosexuals in love and wanting to marry have all had sex.


So in other words, however that person defines their virginity, gay couples are not comprised of people who are/were out there preserving their sexual experiences for their forever partner, as I understand things. (Not to say they didn't at one time try to do so)

Brief stop to search: at least one study seems to bear this out.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10538720.2014.924802

Yes, of course sex and love correlate as far as marriage is concerned, they are designed to go along with each other. But in the Biblical paradigm, marriage and devotion come before sex, yet today it seems for just about everyone, sex comes first as a test drive. I'm saying that test driving sex (or permissiveness of parents in regard to sex) is a leading cause of homosexuality.

Have kids always wanted to rebel from mom and dad and go out and test drive sex? Well, yes, of course! Teen sex drive at warp speed is not a new thought. What does seem new to me is that mom and dad (society) are now shrugging that off, and/or encouraging some kind of middle ground that is not quite full promiscuity, but also isn't exactly stressing commitment.

--------------------
God gave you free will so you could give it back.

Posts: 200 | From: Kansas City | Registered: May 2017  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:


I did not say that gay couples cannot love each other. Just as I don't say that straight couples that look to sex to find love cannot love each other. It is possible of course, to find love using sex. I'm saying that the pattern of looking to sex first to find love is one of the causes of homosexuality. That's all. Lust is a sexual urge, that's all there is too it. I've consistently compared my lust for the hypothetical neighbor's wife as the same as any homosexual urge.

Friend, "homosexual urges" are nothing like your lustful and sinful feelings towards your neighbour's wife.

Good luck in the world. I fear that you're going to need it.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10314 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Aijalon
Shipmate
# 18777

 - Posted      Profile for Aijalon   Email Aijalon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
A good luck farewell! Thanks, that means something [Cool] and good luck to you too!

My apologies to those who have posted sincere thoughts to which I was not able to respond due to my limited time and mental capabilities. [Angel]

[ 24. July 2017, 14:49: Message edited by: Aijalon ]

--------------------
God gave you free will so you could give it back.

Posts: 200 | From: Kansas City | Registered: May 2017  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
So it sounds like what you're saying here is that at least some straight couples fall in love, and then go on to have satisfying marital sex, whereas all gay couples fall in lust, and grow close whilst satisfying their animal urges.

Is that an accurate characterization of what you're saying? 'cause I have to tell you, I know some gay couples who fell in what I would describe as selfless, Christ-like love, just like you're describing as the ideal for straight couples. It's just that they're two guys. I hope and expect that they're enjoying regular satisfying sex, but I know them well enough to know that sex had nothing to do with their falling in love.

Basically, I don't recognize your caricature as describing many of the gay couples I know - and certainly not all of them. And that's the problem I have with your arguments in this thread - they all seem to end up at this imaginary picture of what homosexuality is and what gay people do that bears no relation to the reality that I see. Which means that you build your arguments on sand, and the tide is coming in.

Nowthen, I suppose that my idea of homosexuality could be tainted by the notion that there are no homosexual "virgins" in the sense that homosexuals in love and wanting to marry have all had sex.

So in other words, however that person defines their virginity, gay couples are not comprised of people who are/were out there preserving their sexual experiences for their forever partner, as I understand things. (Not to say they didn't at one time try to do so)

Brief stop to search: at least one study seems to bear this out.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10538720.2014.924802

That study, or at least the abstract of it (which is the only part available without a subscription or paying a fee), doesn't say what you claim it says. If you feel the full article (which most of us can't see) supports your assertion feel free to sling a few quotes our way. Otherwise it just feels like yet another unsupported argumentum ad rectum.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10484 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
A good luck farewell! Thanks, that means something [Cool] and good luck to you too!

My apologies to those who have posted sincere thoughts to which I was not able to respond due to my limited time and mental capabilities. [Angel]

Sincere thought? Sincere, I will take your word for, but there is not much thought in your arguments.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17087 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881

 - Posted      Profile for Soror Magna   Email Soror Magna   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
...
Now in saying all that, you realize of course that the "mechanism" I'm talking here is just a very hazy and brief explanation of an overall unwritten theory. ... my theory must of course fly in the face of science and all the so called "proof" that homosexuality is harmless to society. ...

Well, you didn't put science in scare quotes, so I guess there's some hope.

Anyway, you say your position is hazy, brief, unwritten, and unscientific. You're not at the theory stage yet - you are merely stating a hypothesis. That's a common mistake among those with a minimal understanding of science - like creationists who say, "Evolution is only a theory!" Your hypothesis cannot be tested scientifically for ethical and practical reasons, and will thus remain unproven. Why the <bleep> should anyone take it seriously?

--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"

Posts: 5394 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881

 - Posted      Profile for Soror Magna   Email Soror Magna   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
... But in the Biblical paradigm, marriage and devotion come before sex, ...

Examples, please. From the Bible. Just for starters, Adam and Eve never got married.

--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"

Posts: 5394 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
... But in the Biblical paradigm, marriage and devotion come before sex, ...

Examples, please. From the Bible. Just for starters, Adam and Eve never got married.
"Do you, Adam, take your allegorical clone to be your wife?"

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17087 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
Yes, of course sex and love correlate as far as marriage is concerned, they are designed to go along with each other. But in the Biblical paradigm, marriage and devotion come before sex, yet today it seems for just about everyone, sex comes first as a test drive.

At this point, I'm struggling to believe you've even read the Bible.

Folk have been 'test-driving' for millennia. Ever since we've had parish records, it's shown that high proportion of women getting married had a child baptised less than nine months later. We had this discussion a while back (in Hell) where some folk were so scandalised they simply refused to acknowledge the historical record.

But never mind what the historical record states, the Bible says I can rape a woman and marry her afterwards.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 8907 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
Nowthen, I suppose that my idea of homosexuality could be tainted by the notion that there are no homosexual "virgins" in the sense that homosexuals in love and wanting to marry have all had sex.

Two things on this:

1. A person's idea of homosexuality doesn't matter a gnat's ass. Homosexuality is not a private idea but an objective, observable phenomenon. What matters in such cases is what can be observed, not what a person wishes to think about it. One might as well say, "My idea of gravity is that there are gravitomagnets in the earth." Again it doesn't matter for shit what a person's idea is. Only what is real; only what can be observed, or extrapolated from what is observed.

2. Shipmate orfeo has related more than once about his growing up knowing he was homosexual LONG BEFORE HE EVEN WENT ON A DATE LET ALONE HAD SEX. By any reasonable definition of the words, he was a virgin homosexual. Proving YOUR "idea" of homosexuality as stated is, in fact, bogus. Proving your opinions as expressed here are not based on anything like the preponderance of evidence collected from reality.

--------------------
“Religion doesn't fuck up people, people fuck up religion.”—lilBuddha

Posts: 63201 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772

 - Posted      Profile for Palimpsest   Email Palimpsest   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
Nowthen, I suppose that my idea of homosexuality could be tainted by the notion that there are no homosexual "virgins" in the sense that homosexuals in love and wanting to marry have all had sex.

I had a friend on my volleyball team who was gay, and a virgin untill he met his partner and had a committed relationship. Of course back then he couldn't get married, due to various rules promulgated by Christians with tainted notions about homosexuals.
Their theory was that you shouldn't have sex until marriage and gays weren't allowed to get married.

As for your quaint notion that test drives led to homosexuality, among my high school friends, test drives for the majority led to heterosexual sex.

[ 25. July 2017, 06:13: Message edited by: Palimpsest ]

Posts: 2982 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This discussion of virginity reminds me of something Dan Savage wrote back in 2008 in response to a study that found an increase in the prevalence of anal sex among American teenagers and young adults, where one of the reasons given was "to preserve their virginity". After a good introductory rant, Savage goes off in an interesting direction.

quote:
I've been ranting and raving about the idiocy of abstinence education for 10 years. Obviously I can't beat 'em, so I might as well join 'em. All my life I've had to listen to fundamentalist Christian bigots like Pat Robertson and Rick Warren — Rick Warren, Obama? — fume about all the terrible, no good, really bad sodomy gay men get up to. But I haven't been sodomizing the boyfriend all these years! I've been preserving his virginity.

I've been preserving the shit out of my boyfriend's virginity for 14 years now. If my boyfriend ever decides to marry a woman — miracles can happen! — he'll be able to wear white at his wedding. Hell, he's so pure he can wear Saran Wrap at his wedding. And his wife will have me to thank for delivering him to her with his virginity intact. (Unfortunately, the boyfriend can't preserve my virginity. As a teenager, I had actual vaginal intercourse, under duress, with an actual female's actual vagina.) But until the boyfriend meets the right girl, I'm going to keep preserving the living shit out of his virginity. His virginity isn't going anywhere — not on my watch.

So given a specific definition of "virginity" that limits the sex that counts towards losing said virginity to penis-in-vagina intercourse, there are, in fact, quite a few gay virgins.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10484 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oh dear.

Long-term Shipmates have heard this dozens of times, but for the newbie who is theorising about my teenage or earlier sexual history:

1. I am gay.

2. I came out when I was 33.

3. The first time I ever had any kind of sexualised encounter with another man was when I was 32. We could have all sorts of debate about what exactly constitutes "sex" and therefore when I might technically have lost my virginity, but before the age of 32 I had never kissed, cuddled, necked, fondled etc. etc. etc. a man.

Sexuality simply isn't correlated with actually having sex. Straight guys are still straight when they're teenage guys who've never actually done anything with a girl but get excited at the prospect of it.

There is research from America showing this fundamental disconnect, because when homosexual people talk about homosexuality it's framed in terms of who they desire, whereas when conservative Christians talk about homosexuality they think in terms of actual sexual intercourse (and usually anal intercourse, which in fact about a 1/3 of homosexual men don't like and don't participate in).

And so you end up with conservative Christians imagining homosexuals as engaging in lots of sex because to them, having sex is what homosexuality IS. Which just bears no connection to the real life experience of many homosexuals, such as myself, who had the attraction long before they ever acted on it.

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18143 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Aijalon
Shipmate
# 18777

 - Posted      Profile for Aijalon   Email Aijalon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm here listening, not going to ask anything direct, but would like clarification since you seemed comfortable sharing that.


sure, sex acts may not be required for sexuality, but you would agree that sexuality is intrinsically tied to physicality or desire for physicality or a physical relationship, yes?

with no gay physicality prior to 32, and with something questionable about virginity prior to that taking place, what then was the sexual physicality before 32? Or was this a case of not sharing physically with others up to that point due to not yet being out?

Thanks.

--------------------
God gave you free will so you could give it back.

Posts: 200 | From: Kansas City | Registered: May 2017  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:


with no gay physicality prior to 32, and with something questionable about virginity prior to that taking place, what then was the sexual physicality before 32? Or was this a case of not sharing physically with others up to that point due to not yet being out?

Thanks.

Can I ask you a question? Prior to being married, did you find yourself attracted to women?

Your question seems very odd to me. Sex is clearly an important part of human attraction, but it isn't the totality of it. I'm not sure that this is a controversial thought.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10314 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
ThunderBunk

Stone cold idiot
# 15579

 - Posted      Profile for ThunderBunk   Email ThunderBunk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The following is the closest I can get to describing my experience.

I was completely freaked out by my lack of attraction to the opposite sex during puberty and adolescence, when it was, as it were, breaking out all over everyone else. Having not been introduced to the concept of homosexuality, I thought I was some kind of asexual lump.

Then I went to university and discovered the concept of homosexuality and knew instantly that this fitted me - you could probably have heard that penny dropping from outer space. Being in a place, however, which valued style at least as much as substance, and feeling about stylish as a lump of half-dried putty, I had huge difficulty in allowing my inner awareness of my sexuality to integrate into my overall personhood. This was somewhat alleviated when studying abroad, but having returned without finding a suitable candidate, I retired into a kind of glass closet which I have been in and out of.

My first actual sexual encounter was around the same time as orfeo's, my latest was about 6 or 7 years ago - in my late 30s.

It's a painful part of my life, but one I miss dreadfully even if I have never really explored its possibilities fully. Living with a constant awareness of this is like being a gardener and being given badly made plastic flowers to shove into the ground. I can see what it might be like, but I am so very aware that it's a poor approximation made of low quality substitute materials, that underlines the absence rather than being any kind of palliative for it.

I refuse to be congratulated for my abstinence because it isn't from any kind of principle; it's against my principles because I know I am prevented from flourishing fully by it. It's a constant thorn in my flesh, an ache I could live with for the rest of my life without getting used to it.

--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".

Foolish, potentially deranged witterings

Posts: 2147 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010  |  IP: Logged
ThunderBunk

Stone cold idiot
# 15579

 - Posted      Profile for ThunderBunk   Email ThunderBunk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
...all of which is why anyone trying to force me into their abstract moralising framework gets extremely short shrift from me, and always will.

--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".

Foolish, potentially deranged witterings

Posts: 2147 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010  |  IP: Logged
Aijalon
Shipmate
# 18777

 - Posted      Profile for Aijalon   Email Aijalon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:


with no gay physicality prior to 32, and with something questionable about virginity prior to that taking place, what then was the sexual physicality before 32? Or was this a case of not sharing physically with others up to that point due to not yet being out?

Thanks.

Can I ask you a question? Prior to being married, did you find yourself attracted to women?

Your question seems very odd to me. Sex is clearly an important part of human attraction, but it isn't the totality of it. I'm not sure that this is a controversial thought.

yes, attracted prior to marriage.

is perhaps what you mean to ask is whether I have ever felt attracted to a woman without it being immediately tied to an urge for sex? The older I have become the answer is the more I have been able to find attraction possible while not imagining sex at the end of my daydream. But as a teen the answer is a little different.

I would carry on about how the disconnect takes place that orfeo mentioned, but cannot do so here.

--------------------
God gave you free will so you could give it back.

Posts: 200 | From: Kansas City | Registered: May 2017  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
yes, attracted prior to marriage.

is perhaps what you mean to ask is whether I have ever felt attracted to a woman without it being immediately tied to an urge for sex?

Nope. Homosexual attraction is simply that feeling that you had towards a woman but instead felt towards someone of the same sex. That's it.

In exactly the same way that you had feelings towards women, other people experience attraction to people of the same sex.

quote:
The older I have become the answer is the more I have been able to find attraction possible while not imagining sex at the end of my daydream. But as a teen the answer is a little different.

I would carry on about how the disconnect takes place that orfeo mentioned, but cannot do so here.

I'm sorry - I've been a male teenager, I'm fully aware that sex is a part of attraction. But underlying that is just the absolute reality that I'm attracted to women.

I interacted with plenty of women because I was attracted to them. No sex was offered or expected.

[ 25. July 2017, 20:16: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10314 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Aijalon
Shipmate
# 18777

 - Posted      Profile for Aijalon   Email Aijalon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
well sure, i've interacted with women based on attraction and with full knowledge there was no sex involved. Seems you're saying that flirting without wanting intercourse makes flirting something totally unrelated to sex. Let's call it what it is, flirting with girls is still a sexual behavior. I guess to me, attraction is equivalent or shorthand for sexual-attraction. I don't think it is a workable idea to separate attraction between men and women and it not be a sexual. In the subconscious mind, I'm flirting because the concept of sex is back there adding a whole layer of fun that isn't there for joking with men.

--------------------
God gave you free will so you could give it back.

Posts: 200 | From: Kansas City | Registered: May 2017  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well maybe I'm younger than you are, but I remember being attracted to girls long before I was fully aware of sex. I'm still attracted to women in a way that it is not consciously related to sex.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10314 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:

sure, sex acts may not be required for sexuality, but you would agree that sexuality is intrinsically tied to physicality or desire for physicality or a physical relationship, yes?

Nope.
There are people who are asexual, but are drawn to relationships with a particular gender.
Strike 3. And twenty.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17087 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  13  14  15  16  17 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
Check out Reform magazine
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
  ship of fools