Do you have to have sex first before you can claim to be X?

Tell that to all who are in denial of the obvious.

 

Again, your ignoring the methods used by heterosexuals who are sterile.

They aren't prevented from marrying. We don't call their marriage a "civil union."

You can try to twist and circle away from this fact but it's undeniable.

You have no solid argument.

 

I'd like to ask, did you choose to be heterosexual dixon? Because I sure didn't. I knew I was heterosexual looong before I ever had sex, just like the vast majority of other heterosexuals.

 

....

Common sense would suggest that the greater the arousal, the greater the preference toward that gender/stimulus.

 

It's self-evidently irrelevant to the topic: "Do you have to had sex first before you can claim to be X". The difference between homosexual and heterosexual relationships has no bearing on that question.

 

I don't know anyone here or anywhere else saying that people don't opt to use the words that best describe their sexuality. That's pretty much what terms like "gay" and "straight" are - they are simply labels that people identify with to express their er... inner workings. When someone says "I didn't choose to be gay" they mean they have no control over their actual sexual feelings towards the same-sex. They are not saying "I don't choose to use the word "gay" to describe myself"... Obviously that IS a choice but it's usually the correct one. And many of those who harbour only slight or negligable feelings of attraction towards the opposite sex may also identify as gay for practicality reasons.

 

Actually many of the bisexual individuals I know do indeed know which of the two sexes they are more strongly attracted to. However, that does not erase the fact that they do have attractions for the other sex as well.

 

no (*)(*)(*)(*) Sherlock. Other than asking them, there is no way to determine their preference. Science can no more determine a persons sexual orientation than they can tell if they prefer chocolate over vanilla

 

And sometimes they choose words that don't best describe their sexuality

 

Science knows how to determine sexuality; people don't need to make up methods of knowing.

In any case, there is no need to "shadow" gay people with all this STUPID discussion of who, what or why they are. Just let them be "gay" as we allow "straight" people to be what they are.

Let's all step away from he insanity. Today's young people are making good sense of human sexuality; and once the baby boomers are gone... it will all make more sense.

 

You'd be surprised how many of the baby boomers are actually ok with gays and lesbians now. My mom and step-dad came to accept it and were ok with it soon after my step-sister came out to them. Her own mother had a hard time accepting it for a while but eventually she just realized she needed to get over it and let her daughter be happy.

I think the more parents there are with gay and lesbian kids and seeing how disowning them over this sort of thing is seriously harming them (gay and lesbian teen suicide rate) they are turning around and saying that's not right. It is unfortunate that so much tragedy must happen before people can overcome their prejudices and open their hearts to those in the GLBT community. We're getting there though and you can be assured that the vast majority of young people who have kids in these modern days will teach their own children to be more accepting of other's differences and that it is ok if they are gay themselves.

 

How would they do that? How would they determine someone who is attracted to both sexes, actually prefers one sex over the other?

 

So, you do not think sexual-orientation can be reasonably well-determined by proper examination? (LOL!!)

You can spend the rest of YOUR life hanging in intellectual limbo... but I and many others won't be hanging out with you.

You can look at this... and from there figure out more by yourself. I'm not going to wade into your ignorance and silliness any further.

 

Notice how you are always compelled to respond to my questions, and always refuse to answer them.

 

Revealing what the APA sees as their role regarding homosexuality.
"Since 1975, the American Psychological Association has called on psychologists to take the lead in removing the stigma of mental illness that has long been associated with lesbian, gay, and bisexual orientations. "

 

Which is based on the lack of evidence that homosexuality is a mental illness.

Bravo. You have deduced what people have been saying for decades.

 

dixon, your suggestions are so often LUDICROUS, I'm certain that all I want to do is shoot up an intellectual flare over them... as a marker, so others realize I disagree and will do their own research concerning what you say.
(Either that, or they just laugh with me.)

Your views are something I cannot make sense of anymore; in my view you seem to have side-stepped reality quite a bit.

 

See what I mean. And I read your APA article. Not a single word of it supports your assertion and much of it supports mine. So full of it.

 

Can't imagine what you are going on about now

 

I'm pretty certain we will continue to disagree about that and most other things concerning homosexuality.

So be it.

 

Correct, homosexuality is not a mental illness.

 

Well, yes. But it's usually the bisexuals who use incorrect terms or switch between "gay" and "straight". My point is, what people use as evidence that gay people "choose to be gay" is nothing more than evidence that a) people lie and b) bisexuals exist (and sometimes "pick" a label (gay or straight) because it's easier/more acceptable/avoids jealous partners.

What are you getting at here though? Your one-line answers don't always reveal a lot about where you're going, not surprisingly...

 

Oh stop it. Why don't you copy and paste ANYTHING from the article that even relates to your assertion.Let alone support it.

 

Did you even read my post re genital plethymographs, heart monitors, eye tracker technology ect?

Obviously the greater the response, the greater the physical attraction.

 

You "stop" what you are doing, saying and meaning... and we have a deal.

dixon, you have gone against the APA regularly, with ideas that are hardly valid (vetted by credible science).

I'm going to challenge you here on my terms. You can ignore me and my way if that is the option you take... but my goal is to simply raise the BS flag on most of what you say. People can Google (research) to test and see who/what is right. (Welcome to 2012.)

Now, say what you mean to say, disagree or whatever. But no, I'm not going to "stop" challenging the anti-gay stuff you want to pour into this forum. Sorry.