I was sitting in my room on the computer when I suddenly got an urge to "try something new" with another woman. After I had repented, flogged myself several times, and promised to offer a burnt offering for forgiveness to the All-Powerful, All-Omnipotent, and All-Merciful Ruler of the universe, I skipped back to my bed and said a long, remorseful prayer. Refreshing.


Just kidding :p But, on a more serious note, is this common among either gender? I might just be asking some really weird questions, but does anyone else ever have a moment when they're attracted to the same sex? Is it offensive to people who are naturally inclined to be gay to "experiment"? Personally, even when I was a christian, I didn't know how to deal with the whole issue. It seemed so snotty just to say something like "I love the sinner and not the sin" (picture a victorian noblewoman fanning herself and in a fake, high-pitched voice going "hahahahaha" right after saying this). Now I don't really care. People should be able to be with who they love regardless of who it turns out to be. But I never thought that I'd ever have those types of feelings.


Any other thoughts?

Views: 455

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Further proof that theists are less moral.

...obviously they lie way more!
Christians look to have just about the same amount of people who masturbate, how interesting. I wonder how many of the people who claim they've never masturbated are fundamentalists...I wonder what defines masturbation? Physical stimulation, porn, fantasies in your head? Perhaps a mixture of all? I doubt there'd be many people who could honestly deny having masturbated if that were the case.
Though Kinsey's science was not at all rigorous, and suffers from a lot of bias, his overall point was good: sexuality is probably the most complicated, complex, varied, and personal of human behaviors. There are of course some who would shun you from the GLBT community on the grounds that your homoerotic fantasy can be used by the moralizing Right as evidence that sexuality is a choice (if you're just "experimenting"), and that you are choosing deviance out of some misplaced rebellion, and therefore progressive ideas on sexuality are part of a liberal worldview that is an attack on family values...etc. Embrace what you know about yourself though. It took me years of overcoming religious guilt- and shame-induced repression of attraction to realize that though I usually like females, I can be attracted to men just as well. Both sides of the social debate have a vested political interest in ignoring the full spectrum of sexuality, but we're kind of stuck here until the mainstream accepts their own ambiguous sexual attractions/affections.
It's not that we (as if I spoke for all LGBT) chose the "it's not a choice" as our motto. Like many other issues with the religious, they deny the facts that science have presented before them (that it is in fact, not an actual choice). It would be better to argue "choice or not, a sexual act between consenting adults isn't immoral and the right have an over broad definition of deviance." However, I can't see how using an even broader logic would clear this up for them when they clearly ignore the direct rebutting of scientific facts to their specific claim.
"It is a choice!" "No, it's actually not. Science has proven that sexual orientation..."
"It is a choice!" "Choice or not, we will do what we want to do and you're just hyper-critical."

In either case, they will refute the logical retort. LGBT and Atheists are in different boats paddling against the same current. Close-minded religious fundamentalists. And if you're a LGBT and Atheist--well you're just fucked.
I think Brandon's reply is a good example:  The LGBT community does this IN RESPONSE to the right wing.  The "guilt" you see implied is the guilt the right wing is trying to lay on gay people.  They are refusing it by saying homosexuality is not a choice.  (Though I think they know as well as anyone that for some people it is a choice.  Those people are bi-sexual--or closer to bisexual than people on the ends of the sexual spectrum.  I never mention this to anyone who says it not a choice because I know where they are coming from.  Maybe someday, when the political situation calms down, it will be possible to talk about those who can be happy either way, but right now it's just too important to tell the right-wingers to stop thinking of gays as just people who "choose" to sin.  Even the bisexuals were "born that way", and that is the important point.)
You're right, Mo. I don't think any of us intend to mean that our actions are not a choice, simply that the predetermined attractions are not a choice. We do choose to act on them. Bi-sexuals can choose to act on their hetero-attractions as well as their homo-attractions. But, fact, point and end, it simply isn't a choice the gender(s) we're attracted to.
If we view sexual orientation on a sliding scale, it makes it more confusing to use labels and generalized statements. If you're 80% homosexual and 20% heterosexual (as if we could be that specific) then are you straight, gay, or bisexual? It isn't really clear. I believe sexual attractions can fall anywhere on the radar (or gaydar, if your prefer). If someone says they're 100% straight, barring some sort of psychological repression, I believe them.
Without titles, we are all just humans attracted to other humans. With that in mind, maybe we should change our stance from "Being LGBT is not a choice" to "The physical qualities that attract people to each other are not a choice."

What consenting adults do in private is no one's business but theirs.  That being said, be careful about letting the religious know anything about you that isn't completely "conformist".  They are nasty gossips.  In fact, that fact is one of the best explanations for religion as a social phenomenon.


For humans sex obviously serves other functions besides procreation.  Were that not so we would only want to have sex when women were ovulating and homosexual behavior would be extremely rare if non-existent.  All that licking, sucking and humping with no result going on out there is obviously more about social and psychological needs than procreative needs.







Another thing I've noticed with religious people is that they like to gossip. Alot. In church, with family, with friends, at work, virtually everywhere. At least that's been my experience with most of the religious people I've known. It's something that I've never understood when they're supposed to be so accepting and humble and everything.

It's all a big competition for social status.  If humility is valued, then they will exhibit the "humble" traits the group wants to see.  The very true notion that being judgmental and gossipy is not humble or kind, etc., goes right over their heads.



This and also this
LOL that was good. The looks on people's faces when they were asked when they chose to be straight was perfect. I doubt that anyone has made a conscious "choice" to be homosexual, heterosexual, or anything in between. I think it's more about listening to what your body is telling you. Oh yea, and a chrisitan gene? Sounds rather silly when the sides are switched, doesn't it?
Thank you for the advice :) To be honest, tossing off the label "heterosexual" and going where my feelings lead me seems like it'd be like throwing off a burden. I may technically still have feelings towards the opposite sex, but perhaps feelings for my own sex may develop further if I meet the right person. I'm aware that I have to be cautious in this area, as Craig pointed out. I agree with everyone who has said that sexuality isn't a black and white picture, but varied and complex and completely your own to develop.


© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service