Didn't choose what? These few women certainly shouldn't be labelled as spokespersons for any and every homosexual...but what didn't they choose? "We still like to have sex with guys, we just don't like hanging out with them. We don't want to deal with their crap." -- seems very little about that we'd call genetic...that seems entirely social and completely the product of failed relationships with men. DISCLAIMER: Again...I'm not saying we should say, "aha..here's our real answer" given the response of these girls...but I don't this kind of response leads us to a conclusion that who or what we're attracted to sexually is genetic. If this were the response of every homosexual I know personally, I'd call CASE CLOSED and move on!
They didn't choose to be lesbians it's just what they are is what they were stating. I'm not saying that their quotes should be labeled on ALL lesbians but it just let's me know that I may not be so wrong when I say many homosexuals are products of their genetics and not environment. I shouldn't have said some women but only one of the women said that about having sex with men. I was stating this and saying here I am correct but I was just stating it to show that I may not be wrong about the genetic thing.
Ok..I'm even more confused now. My point is merely that if someone says, "well...i really still like having sex with guys, i just don't like to be around them otherwise," that does little to tell me it's anything other than choice.
If it were genetics, gays would eventually die out because they wouldn't be able to propagate their descendents. If you don't agree with this than you make the assertion that gays are somehow genetically mutated away from what is natural (I'm sorry but they just weren't made to go in there). Its a choice that people make because society says if you are a tad bit effeminate than you are probably gay, which is just dumb. Some people just are effeminate, thats the way things go. Personally, I don't think there is such a thing as gay, but thats just my severe right wing stance on the issue which doesn't really have anything to do with this question so I will spare you guys the lecture.
Yes there are lesbians who will sleep with men and there are gay men who will sleep with women. But it is just sex. Sex feels good no matter who you are doing it with (see guys in prison). That doesn't change who they are attracted to (unless they are truly bisexual and not just looking to get off). Sometimes it's easier to have sex with someone who you know you won't have any emotional attachment to afterwards.
So I here that in the soon to be box office bomb, Gigli(gigily), J-Ho's character is a Lesbian yet she still falls in love with Ben Affleck. I read Gay rights groups aren't to happy with that. Speaking of which, I never saw that Jennifer Aniston movie where she falls for a gay guy, do they hookup in that movie. I mean, they've been playing it on the ABC family channel. Then there's Chasing Amy. . .wait a tick. . .Affleck, lesbian, love. . .WTF!!!
my understanding of prison sex...which thankfully i have scant experience with...is that it's more about power and domination in the prison than it is about pleasure. outlaw, i was the first to say we shouldn't be jumping to any conclusions about any populations regarding the "testimony" of these individuals. i would imagine bisexuality to be at an all-time high right now...it's quite chique! but i will say that i have never considered sex with a man because i knew there would be no emotional attachment the next day. that's just me, though. (let me save RM95 the time and post the counter-joke to these last sentences, "MadMax, then for what reasons have you considered sex with a man?" -- with the obligatory smilie of course! )
What is this evelotionary ecology theory? *CAtholic Church teaching, I know nobody but me is going to agree with this but I'll tell you my stance anyway* Sex is for love. The full act of love incorporates complete giving of oneself to another through God's will and Christ under the sacrament of marriage. This is why Catholics don't advocate contraception, masturbation, foreplay simply for the sake of foreplay, homosexuality, beastiality, or sex before marriage. Thus said, the church knows that people mess up, and as Christ says to Mary Magdalene, it is better that you love too much than love to little. I just think people would be happier if sex became less of an appetative thing, and more of a spiritual thing. It would mean something more. As far as gays are concerned, I just feel sorry for them. I mean, I acknowledge the fact that they might not feel anything towards women, but that doesn't neccesarily mean they are gay. MArriage has really become a joke in this country because people just don't understand it correctly. That said, gay relationships are even worse. They disentigrate even quicker than most marriages. I struggle even to contend with the notion that there is gay, I mean I've only known a few really, but they just seem like nice, sensitive guys, which due to society automatically labels them gay, and I think that sucks for them. I mean years of abuse as a kid for being girly or not living up to the Hemingwayesque model of manlihood that has been created can force someone to think they are gay, just because they don't view every woman as something they have conquered. I'm not trying to turn anybody straight, its just that I think this is an important question if gays and straights are going to understand one another, not just live in the same country and not fight.
Well, at least answer the question you knew I was going to ask. BTW, I feel the same way. Even though a big part of me would love to have a meaningless one night stand at this point in my life, I know I'm not emotionally able to, so I can't. At least, that's what I tell myself when I go home alone every night!
no but they almost did. the gay guy is played by Paul Rudd, who is also on Friends as Phoebe's boyfriend.
actually my point was that if i were going to have that meaningless one night stand, it wouldn't be with a guy! the answer to the question is roughly never.
Rock Hudson and who else? I mean gay has been around since the Greeks and I think people have always been misunderstanding it.
Yet you understand it completely? Richard Chamberlain just came out. Gay has been around long before the Greeks. Yet it continues and like you said we can't procreate. So how has it survived?
Dude you see it in these reports on the gay lifestyle, you talk about it yourself, how sex just feels good and doesn't really mean anything. I mean I'm not saying a gay relationship has never worked, its just that a lot of them don't. I think you can agree that the ones that do are because they just don't treat sex like its going out of style, I guess they try to make something more out of it. Your missing the point though outlaw, I'm not trying to bash gays; I'm saying I don't agree with them and I think its wrong, but I don't think its an ill that needs to be addressed any more than hypocrisoy in the church, or brutal African dictators. If anything, we need to stop that crap first before we can start to work on the blatant casual sex problem in America. Natural law man, thats all I'm saying.
Thats why I said I don't think its natural, its a choice. And gay greeks weren't anything like gays of today, for them it was just sex with whomever and most of them had wives and families, and that didn't make it right either, and they didn't have Christ to look to either.
the infamous "natural" argument. outlaw, kudos to you for fighting a battle that you can't win in here. it's like talking to a wall with this guy. why did this thread have to be resurrected and wtf is "natural law" to you?
