Sexuality is Not a Choice

[DeletedUser]

Danzeman, you may only be shooting the breeze, but your claims of disinterest are at odds with your loaded language. Suppose somebody posted:

"I am tolerant of coloured people and as far as I'm concerned it's ok to be Jewish. Where I live it's more normal to be white, but I really don't mind if some people are abnormal and they can do what they like in the privacy of their own communities. Only their kids may be picked on for being different so it might be better if they didn't raise a family"
​

You can see what's wrong with that, right?

Back on-topic, research into church programmes to 'cure' gay people has shown that their success rate is very low; within the margin of statistical error in fact. It seems likely that sexual preference can be modified only marginally, and until those who claim that it is a choice can back that up with some hard, real-world data it would be better and more honest if they admitted that their belief was no more than that, and stopped confusing it with fact.

 

[DeletedUser30834]

If there isn't a choice and because of that, in which we should all automatically accept it, then how can we not accept pedophiles getting off at watching kids at the public swimming pool or wiping the snot from their noses at playgrounds for schools? Most pedophiles are barred from being near places where children normally congregate. Is that bigotry too?

Here is the problem, sexuality is completely about sex. It's the basic definition of it. If that isn't the word you are trying to use, then find one more appropriate to convey your thoughts. Sex is completely a choice. You chose to have it or not. Homosexuality is specifically about sex with the same sex. Again, if you want to describe an effeminate man loving another man non-sexually or just two people of the same sex being attracted to each other, find a different word to use. This is evident in our laws pertaining to rape where if one party doesn't consent to the sex, or even with bestiality where one participant can't give consent- it is a violation of law.

It may not be a choice of who someone is attracted to, but it is a choice in which they model their sexual behavior in order to obtain a label like homosexual. It would be incorect to label someone gay or homosexual who has not ever had sex with the of the same sex as they are. Sex is always a choice and people make decisions about it all the time- gay or strait.

One of the biggest problems with these lines of arguments is the complete misuse of the dictionary. Being gay is a choice as long as we expect other sexual preferences and perversions to remain controlled between consenting adults. What leads a person to the state of being labeled gay or kiddie molester or farm animal good time girl is another situation altogether. Sexual orientation or preference may or may not be a choice but sexuality certainly is. Confusing or conflating the two does seem convenient as it pretends to validate one with the other but it completely falls apart is anyone is paying attention.

and again, I'm not responding to replied to this post.

 

[DeletedUser]

I think the big problem (especially with Danzeman) is purely semantics. Sexuality - mainly meaning the state of having sex - is a choice; sexual orientation - the inclination to be heterosexual, homosexual or bi-sexual - isn't.

Sorry Sumdumass. I just read your last post, and I think you said pretty much the same thing... I should delete this, but I seldom do what I should.

 

[DeletedUser]

No confusion at all (except in the mind of Sumdumbas, maybe).
The title of the thread is "Sexuality is Not a Choice". That's crystal clear. It's not "Sex is Not a Choice" - that would not be a discussion as we all know that whether to initiate sex or not is a choice.
Maybe some people didn't get it. Oh well, whatcha gonna do?

 

[DeletedUser16008]

Oh come on people think about what your saying. Your suggesting that as long as someone gay dosnt have sex its not a choice but the minute he does he chooses to be homosexual, simply because of the act of sex. How shallow is that ?

I'm assuming those that suppose its all a matter of choice have not a clue about the rest of life and what being with a partner is all about. You can use whatever words you wish to find in the dictionary that some spark has made up for exactly this point of arguing semantics, or you can look at the whole picture.

Tell me if you know anyone who woke up one day and thought ... hmmm yesterday I wasnt but I think today ill be gay, just for the choice of it.

Your confusing minor semantics with basic hardwiring.

You have a choice if you eat or not no ? but then hunger is a natural hardwired physiological urge... and so is sex... it is a strong basic urge not a simple choice as some seem to be making it out to be. It isnt like choosing to go swimming next Friday or where you wish to go on holiday... dont believe me ? why then is it so prevalent for priests etc that have abstained from sex to be found engaging in paedophilia and homosexuality so frequently ? its simply because the same sex and minors are available to them rather than the opposite sex, sure its a choice but its obviously a bit more than the word implies... sex is a choice but its not a simple one like what colour t shirt to put on.

It would be nice when people wish to pick on semantics to try and look at the whole picture. Instead of simply suggesting all choices are the same and influenced by nothing let alone animal attraction and instinct... they are not of the same level, importance or really even worthy of the word choice maybe come up with a better word in the first place.

As sumdumb has pointed out Choice is the wrong word in the first place. No one has used the word urge or drive or desire, yearning, longing, wishing, compulsion, impulse etc.... all of these are used in sexual context but not once when weve been discussing homosexuality by anyone who likes to come up with the mantra of its a choice...now why is that ?

You see how very different and importance of the word choice next to urge or desire or yearning ? the heterosexual world uses such words far more intensely yet homosexuality is a merely a simple choice.... meh give me a break

sumdumbas

D&D is debate and discussion. If your not prepared to debate, discuss and defend your point of view then don't waste ours or your time posting here

 

[DeletedUser]

Oh come on people think about what your saying. Your suggesting that as long as someone gay dosnt have sex its a not a choice but the minute he does he chooses to be homosexual, simply because of the act of sex. How shallow is that ?

That isn't what I said, and I don't believe it's what he was saying either. The wrong word isn't "choice", it's "sexuality".

I'm assuming here that those that suppose its all a matter of choice have not a clue about the rest of life and what being with a partner is all about. ...You have a choice if you eat or not no ? but then hunger is a natural hardwired physiological urge... and so is sex... it is a strong basic urge not a simple choice as some seem to be making it out to be.

You're making the same mistake that you accuse others of making. Just because you can't/choose not to live without a partner, that doesn't mean it isn't possible for others to. I made the decision 15-20 years ago to give up on relationships. I don't go out and have sex with someone just because it's convenient and I haven't done it in years. I have no problem whatsoever with celibacy.

It isnt like choosing to go swimming next Friday or where you wish to go on holiday... dont believe me ? why then is it so prevalent for priests etc that have obtained from sex to be found engaging in paedophilia and homosexuality so frequently ? its simply because the same sex and minors are available to them rather than the opposite sex, sure its a choice but its obviously a bit more than the word implies...

I don't believe it's because kids and same sex individuals are more accessible than the opposite sex. I believe it's because they don't want to give in to their desires, and having the access is more than they can resist. Not all priests break the vow of celibacy, but I question the commitment of those who do. I'm also not so naive that I don't know that there are some who are predators and choose that "calling" because of that accessibility.

You see how very different and importance of the word choice next to urge or desire or yearning ? the heterosexual world uses such words far more intensely yet homosexuality is a merely a simple choice.... meh give me a break

Personally, I don't think homosexuality has anything to do with sex. I know many people in same sex relationships, including several relatives. I know I couldn't live their lifes, anymore than they could live mine; I can't even stand having a female roommate in a platonic relationship, and have never met one I was in the least bit sexually attracted to. Having sex is a choice, but being attracted to, falling in love with, or wanting to share your life with, specific people usually isn't.

 

[DeletedUser16008]

I disagree Gordon,Sex for a high % is not merely a choice, choice is the wrong word. You assume everyone runs with the same libido and chemical hormones and level. They don't, no more than people do at certain ages re sexual activity.

Im certainly not talking about me or even sex just this idea that being attracted to a certain gender is supposedly a choice... its just not and confusing it with sex and that its just a choice thing excuse is really only used by religious orders and others that find gays a threat for some reason.

If priests etc wished to they have every opportunity to engage with the opposing sex. mostly they are there because it gives the predator a perfect environment re molesting minors or they were most likely gay in the first place and couldnt for some reason live a normal gay life and tried to suppress it, probably through peer pressure hense the overly large gay % in the professional religious community. I would like to point out that neither group are connected.

 

[DeletedUser]

If priests etc wished to they have every opportunity to engage with the opposing sex. mostly they are there because it gives the predator a perfect environment re molesting minors or they were most likely gay in the first place and couldnt for some reason live a normal gay life and tried to suppress it, probably through peer pressure hense the overly large gay % in the professional religious community. I would like to point out that neither group are connected.

That's more or less what I said. You said

its simply because the same sex and minors are available to them rather than the opposite sex, sure its a choice but its obviously a bit more than the word implies...

and I was just saying that I don't think it has anything to do with having same sex and minors more available than the opposite sex; if they weren't attracted to them in the first place, they're no more likely to abuse them than any heterosexual. I do believe that some men become priests because they believe it's a "calling" and do live a celibate life - or leave the priesthood when they realize that they can't live that way. I also believe there are many who become priests because of predator tendencies, and those men have no intentions of remaining celibate. There are also those who choose it because they believe acting on their feelings would be a sin, but eventually give in to the temptation. It's possible that you meant something in the statement I quoted other than what I read it to mean; if so, we're probably arguing for the same side. :unsure:

I do believe that anyone could choose to never have sex, but it would probably drive a high percentage crazy if they tried. I'd never expect someone else to live my asexual lifestyle anymore than I'd expect anybody to choose a heterosexual lifestyle if they weren't heterosexual. There is a difference between choosing to live a heterosexual lifestyle and choosing to be heterosexual. I think that's where a lot of people get confused. Just because a person could be forced to do it, that doesn't mean that they should be.

 

[DeletedUser16008]

lol yes we are discussing the same side just slightly different approaches thats all

 

[DeletedUser]

Danzeman, you may only be shooting the breeze, but your claims of disinterest are at odds with your loaded language. Suppose somebody posted:

"I am tolerant of coloured people and as far as I'm concerned it's ok to be Jewish. Where I live it's more normal to be white, but I really don't mind if some people are abnormal and they can do what they like in the privacy of their own communities. Only their kids may be picked on for being different so it might be better if they didn't raise a family"
​

You can see what's wrong with that, right?

Yes, what I meant by that is:
When a child is adopted by a homosexual couple, the child's welfare would be the number one priority as in any hetrosexual relationship.
No one knows if the child will grow up accepting it, parts of society will frown upon it and the child may get victimized for it, these have to be considered not because the authorities bow down to bullies but because they don't want to put the child into an abusive environment that they are (at that time) responsible for, not from the adopters but from society itself.
You must realize that if you were adopted by a gay couple, you would be judged differently than if you were adopted by a hetrosexual couple by society?
I am not arguing they are unable to give the child the love and attention he/she needs or that they have an inability to be a parent.
I do know that deep down everyone should accept it but in reality it is not so.

Don't take this as me being part of that society that is against gay adoption, take it as an understanding of why it has been and still is a task for some gay couples to adopt (illegal still in some places).
I appreciate your comment though, I do admit I shoot from the hip sometimes, that is because I don't get time to explain in detail due to rl work and family commitments, hands up and sorry if I offended anyone.

As for the topic Sexuality is not a choice:

When I define sexuality, I break it down like this:
1. Sexual attraction (Not a choice)
2. Sexually aroused over some thought or activity (Not a choice)
3 Involvement in sexual activity (this is surly a choice?)

I think we're going on about the mental side more than the physical side of it, in which case sexuality would not be a choice (purely mental side), the word sexuality includes both the mental and physical side as a definition doesn't it?
Nearly every physical thing we do is a choice, I did mention desire and urges way back in this thread and no one can control that, it's when physical contact takes place, that is what makes it a choice.

 

[DeletedUser30834]

D&D is debate and discussion. If your not prepared to debate, discuss and defend your point of view then don't waste ours or your time posting here

I'll do whatever i feel like doing. if it bothers you, then ignore my posts.

As for the topic Sexuality is not a choice:

When I define sexuality, I break it down like this:
1. Sexual attraction (Not a choice)
2. Sexually aroused over some thought or activity (Not a choice)
3 Involvement in sexual activity (this is surly a choice?)

This is what I was getting at. Points one and two pertain to "sexual orientation" and "preference" where three pertains to sexuality. They are not one in the same. Point three getting interchanged with points one and two leads to nothing but confusion. There is a choice over sexuality but they may or may not be a choice over orientation or preference. A person is not gay or homosexual until they take action on their sexuality that by definition labels them. Gay is defined as either a mood or tempo or a homosexual. Homosexual is defined by someone who has_had_sex with someone of the same sex.

There are tons of slurs that can be used to describe someone who is gay oriented but has not acted on it. Sometimes these slurs are used to describe heterosexual people who are either butch or effeminate (depending on their base sex) and are typically meant to be just as insulting.

Also, note that I did not say whether it was right or wrong for them to choose to act on that preference. I made my thoughts on that clear in another thread. I'm saying if you treat sexuality as orientation or preference and claim there is not a choice, then some pedophiles and rapist can claim a lack of choice too. One of the things besides opposable thumbs that separates humans from most animals is the ability to reason and make decisions or choices. Sex is a choice no matter how you look at it, else it is rape according to the law.

I think the big problem (especially with Danzeman) is purely semantics. Sexuality - mainly meaning the state of having sex - is a choice; sexual orientation - the inclination to be heterosexual, homosexual or bi-sexual - isn't.

Don't remove your post. That is exactly what I was saying but you seemed to present it a lot more clear then I could.

 

[DeletedUser]

Sex is a choice no matter how you look at it, else it is rape according to the law.

You are still confusing sex with sexuality. I refer you to my earlier post.

I'm saying if you treat sexuality as orientation or preference and claim there is not a choice, then some pedophiles and rapist can claim a lack of choice too.

By bringing rape into this you are repeating the confusion. Rape is a chosen act, sexuality is not. It's not my choice to be attracted to women, but I can choose not to rape them.
Again, the paedophile does not choose to be attracted to minors, any more than the rest of us choose not to. The element of choice is whether he acts on the desire.

The argument is whether a person can choose his/her sexual orientation. Some (notably, Christian) groups have argued that this is possible but this contradicts my own experience and scientific evidence, so I reject it. I never "chose" to be straight, and I believe others when they say they did not choose their sexuality either.

One of the things besides opposable thumbs that separates humans from most animals is the ability to reason and make decisions or choices.

I'm glad you said "most" because as well as opposable thumbs some animals do appear capable of reason and choice.

 

[DeletedUser30834]

lol.. sexuality is all about sex. Every definition available makes the claim it is about sex. That is why I introduced orientation and preference- to signify a separation from the act of sex.

The rape and pedophilia was brought up to illustrate the absurdity of claiming sexuality is not a choice and "walla", you try to emphasize that while claiming the concept is somehow wrong. You even grasp the subject attempting to use the term sexuality to mean orientation or preference as being separate from sex and claim it is sex at the same time. Basically the argument can be phrased as : red is green, not all people should proceed threw an intersection on a green light.

The argument is whether a person can choose his/her sexual_orientation_. Some (notably, Christian) groups have argued that this is possible but this contradicts my own experience and scientific evidence, so I reject it. I never "chose" to be straight, and I believe others when they say they did not choose their sexuality either.

Well, no.. That is likely the argument whoever copied this from the other thread intended but it is not the argument presented or discussed here for the most part. The argument presented happened to be whether or not when a person chooses to pursue or participate in sex and who with is a choice or not because of the incorrect usage of sexuality instead of orientation or preference.

This is a thread titled sexuality is not a choice in response to a comment about homosexuality being a choice. Both by definition pertain to sexual acts or the contemplation of sexual acts and sex is a choice. In essence, it is arguing that a choice is not a choice.

 

[DeletedUser]

lol.. sexuality is all about sex. Every definition available makes the claim it is about sex. That is why I introduced orientation and preference- to signify a separation from the act of sex.

lol... selective reading;

sexuality
capacity for sexual feelings
• a person's sexual orientation or preference : people with proscribed sexualities.
• sexual activity.

1 word...2 meanings...do I need to explain the concept further?

This is a thread titled sexuality is not a choice in response to a comment about homosexuality being a choice. Both by definition pertain to sexual acts or the contemplation of sexual acts and sex is a choice. In essence, it is arguing that a choice is not a choice.

your argument hinges on sex and sexuality being the same. see above.
widening the perspective however, your entire argument hinges on dictionary definitions, yet you can provide no hard evidence on whether genetics has a part to play in a person's sexual orientations, which is what this thread is about.

 

[DeletedUser16008]

Talk about trying to take the discussion away from proper debate on the original topic in favour of playing with the dictionary meaning of words.

The topic was simple and clear everyone understood its intent and meaning well enough only sumdum as usual wants to talk about the dictionary over the actual topic and turn to selective pointless doubletalk.

Its not hard to doubletalk re words. Choice is a verbal sound made up by man, nothing more than a few movements of your vocal chords and this is your argument ? :laugh:

The animal kingdom has no such sound and yet engages in every form of sex you can imagine, homophobic, homosexual and even plationic is in nature and throughout the animal kingdom. We are not created out of mud or fairy dust or whatever else some fictional fantasy writing would have you believe. Humans are just a higher evolved animal and no different apart from maybe having a conscience. On a basic level it massively effects peoples actions, its genetic, hormonal, chemical etc ... in fact its that animalistic basic drive most peoples consciousness will be battling with all the time.

The truth of it is pretty clear and is increasingly based on hard evidence in science, medical, experementation, personal statement and investigation of thousands of years of history.

To try to bring it down to arguing about a definition in a dictionary is just trolling and seeks to avoid the point and intent of the topic.

 

[DeletedUser]

and again, I'm not responding to replied to this post.

*Sigh*....if only...
You're still not getting it. Oh well, good choice of nickname tho'.

 

[DeletedUser]

lol... selective reading;

sexuality
capacity for sexual feelings
• a person's sexual orientation or preference : people with proscribed sexualities.
• sexual activity.

1 word...2 meanings...do I need to explain the concept further?



your argument hinges on sex and sexuality being the same. see above.
widening the perspective however, your entire argument hinges on dictionary definitions, yet you can provide no hard evidence on whether genetics has a part to play in a person's sexual orientations, which is what this thread is about.

I think what sumdumbass is trying to say I think:

sexuality
capacity for sexual feelings
• a person's sexual orientation or preference : people with proscribed sexualities.
• sexual activity.

1 word...2 meanings...do I need to explain the concept further?

Is this what Willypete meant when he used the word sexuality?

The word sexuality has 2 meanings, mental "desires or urges"- This EVERYONE has agreed is uncontrollable and not a choice.

Physical contact- This is a choice, any physical contact is a choice (unless it's rape ect). As victor has already stated, this is where it gets murky and where the argument is about the use of the word sexuality and choice, were these the wrong words to use in the first place (Willypete)?.

Because OBVIOUSLY sexual feelings or attraction are not a choice, acting them out are.
It's just all about definitions of the word sexuality, we are really arguing the same word but different definitions of the word lol.

The thread was created from a quote on Willypete, so if Willypete was defining sexuality as the sexual part or both meanings then is Hellstromm guilty of selective meaning of the word sexuality by creating this thread in the first place?

Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[DeletedUser17649]

Sexuality has two meanings, that is correct but the quote was about homosexuality.

I'm not entirely sure but it feels like the people that argue that sexuality is a choice thinks in terms of sodomy and 'eros and agape' rather than biology.

 

[DeletedUser30834]

There is not two meanings, look at the definition again. And this time, do a search and pick a reputable dictionary sites instead of whatever fly by night piece you can find that that shows what you want it to. You can't substitute the definition of something with whatever suits your fancy then claim it is proof that it is not a choice. Otherwise it would be just as valid for flat earthers to claim flat means circular therefore the earth is actually flat.

and who cares about whether genetics plays a role in it or not. Even if gays are gentic mutations or freaks of nature designed to not reproduce or destined to remove their genes from the Human Gene Pool in some natural selective Darwinistic suicide ritual, they are still people. I find it somewhat offensive stating that gays are genetic freaks that nature destined to kill off from the gene pool.

but hey, by all means do not reproduce and spare us the insanity of dealing with the offspring who will no doubtfully be just as ridiculous.

 

[DeletedUser]

He did say homosexuality is a choice, then I 100% agree with what Willypete said.
When you only become a homosexual, hetrosexual or bisexual after sex, that is a choice so to be a homosexual you must have had sex and condoned it, making it a choice.

And sexuality is also about having sex (it is one word that describes 3 stages), not just the mental or physical side.
I totally agree with Sumdumass.