If you could choose your...

[msj]

And what is with this lack of trust - have I been dishonest here ?

Not at all.

You have moderated a very good discussion on this.

[jacee]

No, you're wrong. There's a reason why 99.9% of incidents involve boys and not girls.

No you're wrong.

A child rapist is a pedophile.

.

[msj]

It actually probably is. Certainly unnatural. I actually didn't say what you're saying I did. I said with a sexual partner you can't procreate with.

This is strange logic.

Given how many instances of homosexual behaviour have been observed among thousands of species, given videos of bears and kangaroos masturbating and given the prevalence of fellatio and cunilinguis throughout human history, to call any of this "unnatural" or "not natural" goes against scientific facts.

Just because you don't like it does not mean it's not natural.

As Nietschze observed: there is no moral phenomena at all, only moral interpretations of phenomena.

[eyeball]

And if you step back for a moment and think about it, asking "why would anyone choose to be gay?" is like asking in the 1960s, "why would anyone choose to marry outside their race?" There comes a point where the intellectual masturbation starts to ignore the human impact of such comments and how they degrade others.

This is the point when it's fair to ask why anyone would choose to be disgusted, fearful or hateful towards gays.

Choice is completely irrelevant.

I look forward to science based arguments that the abovementioned emotions people have towards sexual orientation are not actually choices but biological imperatives that they have no control over.

The only question now is how much people are willing to degrade themselves trying to explain this.

Edited March 9, 2015 by eyeball

[Smallc]

This is strange logic.

Given how many instances of homosexual behaviour have been observed among thousands of species, given videos of bears and kangaroos masturbating and given the prevalence of fellatio and cunilinguis throughout human history, to call any of this "unnatural" or "not natural" goes against scientific facts.

Just because you don't like it does not mean it's not natural.

As Nietschze observed: there is no moral phenomena at all, only moral interpretations of phenomena.

If you look several posts back, you'll see I said homosexuality is natural (I'm very much in favour of gay rights and I am aware of its occurrence in nature). We were talking about blowjobs...for some reason that I have yet to understand.

[Smallc]

If it has to do with procreation, why wasn't this gene that causes males to be gay not have been eradicated by now? There must be a reason to have these gay men in our population. Perhaps to encourage tolerance? Another theory is that women who have gay sons are more prolific at making babies, so maybe there's that! Bring on those gay babies!

There are some studies that indicate it's related to normal differences during gestation. Homosexuality occurs in nature. It's oretty obviously not a choice.

[Smallc]

I think it's also important to note that I support being gay as a choice. I just don't think that it is a choice of one a (male) human would freely make or that would advantage them in any way.

[BC_chick]

The thread-drift notwithstanding, what I'm getting from this thread is that, given the choice, most of us would choose to be straight white males.

Yet some people claim that we live in an equal-opportunity society where prejudices and sexism is a thing of the past. Interesting.

[eyeball]

I think it's also important to note that I support being gay as a choice. I just don't think that it is a choice of one a (male) human would freely make or that would advantage them in any way.

What if the choice was a political statement and it caused public attitudes to become less inimical towards them?

[Smallc]

The thread-drift notwithstanding, what I'm getting from this thread is that, given the choice, most of us would choose to be straight white males.

Yet some people claim that we live in an equal-opportunity society where prejudices and sexism is a thing of the past. Interesting.

Individual prejudice certainly isn't a thing of the past. That's the difference.

[BC_chick]

Individual prejudice certainly isn't a thing of the past. That's the difference.

Individual prejudice certainly isn't a thing of the past. That's the difference.

Where do you think institutionalized prejudices come from? Individual prejudices.

[Smallc]

Where do you think institutionalized prejudices come from? Individual prejudices.

That's not what institutionalized prejudice really is. It's also questionable that with all of the safeguards and checks that it could actually have that much of an impact.

[jbg]

Race ? Sexual preference ? Gender ?

What would you choose ?

Some on another thread were insulted by Shady's statement that nobody would choose to be gay, however given that you can't choose the natural state of these things, strictly speaking, I think I agree with him. But it's a comment on the discrimination that people face based on these classifications, nothing more.

I just saw Larry Wilmore on the Nightly Show ask a panel of black women which they would choose to be and the respondent answered and reaffirmed that she'd be a white man, because she has to do "twice as much to get half the reward".

Yes... white, straight, male. I feel lucky and privileged.

How about you ?

Ditto.

[BC_chick]

That's not what institutionalized prejudice really is. It's also questionable that with all of the safeguards and checks that it could actually have that much of an impact.

I said it's the basis for institutionalized racism.

And of course it. It's individual prejudices that lead to systematic prejudices.

[Smallc]

And of course it. It's individual prejudices that lead to systematic prejudices.

It's difficult to properly quantify if that's actually happening. There are far too many variables.

[kimmy]

I'm too happy with my life right now to think that I would have done it any other way if I'd had a choice.

-k

[Argus]

The thread-drift notwithstanding, what I'm getting from this thread is that, given the choice, most of us would choose to be straight white males.

Yet some people claim that we live in an equal-opportunity society where prejudices and sexism is a thing of the past. Interesting.

The society is, but the individual members of that society, well, not so much.

Anyway, being a male as opposed to a female has little to do with prejudice. Males are generally bigger and stronger. So why not be one? And if you have kids, well, you're not the one who has to bear them. The only societal advantage I'd see with being male is you're much less likely to get hit on by persistent, often drunken jerks, and more capable of doing something about it if you are.

As for being gay. I see no societal advantage or disadvantage in terms of discrimination by institutions. However, I see no advantages either. But being hetero means you have a much larger selection for mates, and can have kids without lying to them or adopting. Heterosexual relationships also appear to be more stable on a long-term basis.You're also less likely to be insulted by drunken jerks.

[cybercoma]

Your quote from a few pages back:

My assessment of that statement: "he feels that the idea of inherent biological sexuality is intolerant to discuss."

Your most recent quote:

What am I missing ? And what is with this lack of trust - have I been dishonest here ?

I love how you'll just ignore the totality of my argument to focus on one pedantic issue. When you're ready to be serious, let me know. Otherwise, just keep supporting bigoted dirtbags who label homosexuals as pedophiles.

[LemonPureLeaf]

I love how you'll just ignore the totality of my argument to focus on one pedantic issue. When you're ready to be serious, let me know. Otherwise, just keep supporting bigoted dirtbags who label homosexuals as pedophiles.

It seems that a lot of pedophiles are gay.

Just look at the gay male community itself. They love young looking males. The younger the better. Look at the posters plastered in the gay village. Many depict young teen looking males. Scantly clad.

The male gay community at large likes young looking teenage males.

Go to any male prostitution strip and see what is there. Young looking and teenage boys.

That says everything right there.

[Mighty AC]

I love how you'll just ignore the totality of my argument to focus on one pedantic issue. When you're ready to be serious, let me know. Otherwise, just keep supporting bigoted dirtbags who label homosexuals as pedophiles.

I think many, especially Catholics, really want a link between homosexuality and pedophilia to exist; despite the fact that research has shown otherwise. History illustrates that humans readily heap false crimes upon those labelled as enemies. Jews were accused of sacrificing Christian babies, Blacks in the US south were routinely falsely accused of raping white women to justify lynchings, beatings, etc.

It would be ever so convenient if a group vilified by religion could also be blamed for the sickening crimes of Christianity's largest sect. So reality be damned, the religious have their scapegoat, besides they have never really been troubled by fictitious beliefs to begin with.

Edited March 9, 2015 by Mighty AC

[Michael Hardner]

Look at the posters plastered in the gay village.

Sorry ? What is gay village ? You seem to be anti-gay so why would you go there ? Have you been to pride ?

[Michael Hardner]

I love how you'll just ignore the totality of my argument to focus on one pedantic issue.

I'm not sure what is going on here. It's at the very outset of your post - you bring me under suspicion for intellectual dishonesty. I'm trying to clear up a problem here.

You come back at me yet again by saying I'm not being serious. Well, I am very serious. You seem to be uninterested in getting through this impasse with me.

As to the link between homosexuals and pedophilia - that's just a fringe opinion. People who believe that just want to believe such things and won't be convinced otherwise so I'd rather not entertain it.

Edited to add: I'm really taken aback as to the degree of distrust here. We should probably just table that as something to be addressed rather than continue. When I tried to address it in my post, you said that I was ignoring the rest of your post. Well, I think we have to get through this bit first as you seem to have no trust in my ability to discuss things with you honestly.

[Argus]

I think many, especially Catholics, really want a link between homosexuality and pedophilia to exist; despite the fact that research has shown otherwise.

Got a cite for that research?

I would not doubt, by the way, that pedophilia is distinct from homosexuality. As far as I'm aware pedophilia is a psychological disorder by which these people are fixated on pre-pubescent children. It has nothing to do with homosexuality.

However, all those cases of men molesting adolescent boys are not cases of pedophilia, however much the media likes to label them as such.

Edited March 9, 2015 by Argus

[Mighty AC]

Got a cite for that research?

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

Rarely does a pedophile experience sexual desire for adults of either gender. They usually don't identify as homosexual; the majority identify as heterosexual, even those who abuse children of the same gender. They are sexually aroused by extreme youth, not by gender.

In contrast, child molesters often exert power and control over children in an effort to dominate them. They do experience sexual desire for adults but molest children episodically, for reasons apart from sexual desire, much as rapists enjoy power, violence, and controlling their humiliated victims. Indeed, research strongly suggests that a child molester isn't any more likely to be homosexual than heterosexual.

In fact, some research shows that for pedophiles, the gender of the child is immaterial. Accessibility is more the factor in whom a pedophile abuses. This may explain the high incidence of children molested in church communities and fraternal organizations, where the pedophile may more easily have access to children.

In these situations, an adult male is trusted by those around him, including children and their families. Males are often given access to boys to mentor, teach, coach, and advise. Therefore, a male pedophile may have easier access to a male child. In trying to make sense of an adult male's sexually abusing a male child, many of us mislabel it as an act of homosexuality, which it isn't.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-kort-phd/homosexuality-and-pedophi_b_1932622.html

Edited March 9, 2015 by Mighty AC

[Mighty AC]

What About Claims That Scientific Research Proves Gay Men Are Likely To Molest Children?

Some conservative groups have argued that scientific research strongly supports their claims that homosexuality and pedophilia are linked. The Family Research Council has produced what is perhaps the most extensive attempt to document this claim. It is an article by Timothy J. Dailey titled Homosexuality and Child Abuse.

With 76 footnotes, many of them referring to papers in scientific journals, it appears at first glance to be a thorough and scholarly discussion of the issue. On further examination, however, its central argument – that "the evidence indicates that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls" – doesn't hold up.

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html