so i know someone who disagrees with gays but i agree :yes: so what are you ? gay? straight ? or bi-sexual? i am bi-sexual but what i always wondered how do you attract the same sex to you and go and get a relationship if they aint gay or bi ? 
Latest on MJJC
- Latest Michael Jackson News
- Click Here to Join Our Community
- Follow us on X
- Wanna talk Michael? Come join the chat rooms
- The Michael Jackson Chart Watch
- Become an MJJC Patron
- Join the Premium Member Group and Get Lot's of Extra's
- Major Love Prayer - Worldwide Monthly Prayer Every 25th
- MJJC Exclusive Q&A - We talk to the family and those in and around Michael
- Join us in the Chat Rooms
- Find us on Facebook
sexuality
- Thread starter MJ~And~Me
- Start date
I am "straight" but I support "gay/lesbian/bi" all the way. I use quotes because I'm not really into labels when it comes to this issue. Who are we to judge people for who they fall in love with or what kind of people they are attracted to? The way I see it, I'm in love with one person. Not someone who just a guy but a person. I love him for who he is not because he's male.
My best friend just came out of a short relationship with another girl. It was something I nor she ever expected to happen but she really liked this girl. Not because she was a girl but because she liked her for who she was and loved being around her. She's not into girls, she just liked that one girl.
My best friend just came out of a short relationship with another girl. It was something I nor she ever expected to happen but she really liked this girl. Not because she was a girl but because she liked her for who she was and loved being around her. She's not into girls, she just liked that one girl.
Hazard
Proud Member
I am definately straight but also support homosexuality as I believe everyone has the right to love whoever they want.
Ashtanga
Proud Member
Me too. -_-
kindofdisco
Proud Member
I believe everyone is born bi, but we're conditioned by society to take a certain path. I myself have only been in relationships with men, but I've been attracted to girls as well. I just think you go with whatever your heart tells you.
Severus Snape
Proud Member
I'm technically bisexual, but to be honest, I'm not very physically attracted to either sex. I can notice pretty men and girls, but to take it as far as saying I am attracted to them in that way would be a stretch. I'm more enamoured by a person's manner of being--you could say I feel for them in spite of their gender rather than because of it. Does that make sense? Perhaps not.
In any case, that's my experience. I do, however, have a very specific "type," not something I look for specifically or consciously, but pretty much every single male I've ever fancied fit this description: very intelligent (usually teachers, professors, scientists, or other academic minds), and/or artistic (usually photographers or writers), of mature years, grey hair, blue/green eyes, glasses.
As for girls, I usually tend to go for the pretty and average/slightly dumb ones. I do admit to being a bit more physical in that regard. I like girls my age or a bit younger. 17-19. However, I like girls with airy/bubbly/cheerful personalities, I reckon to counter my own morose nature--the total opposite of how I like my men, usually the more they are like me, the more brownie points they get. Perhaps that's because I consider myself male. I must say, this gentleman prefers blondes.
I'm a bisexual man stuck in a woman's body. HELP! But...that's a whole other issue now...
In any case, that's my experience. I do, however, have a very specific "type," not something I look for specifically or consciously, but pretty much every single male I've ever fancied fit this description: very intelligent (usually teachers, professors, scientists, or other academic minds), and/or artistic (usually photographers or writers), of mature years, grey hair, blue/green eyes, glasses.
As for girls, I usually tend to go for the pretty and average/slightly dumb ones. I do admit to being a bit more physical in that regard. I like girls my age or a bit younger. 17-19. However, I like girls with airy/bubbly/cheerful personalities, I reckon to counter my own morose nature--the total opposite of how I like my men, usually the more they are like me, the more brownie points they get. Perhaps that's because I consider myself male. I must say, this gentleman prefers blondes.
I'm a bisexual man stuck in a woman's body. HELP! But...that's a whole other issue now...
Rudolf
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2009
- Messages
- 4,187
- Points
- 48
I'm straight. But I think you can do what you want if you think it's right. It's your decision. I have no problem with non-straight people and I don't hate them. But I can't say I support them. I rather just ignore it. And I won't argue or discuss with anyone about this, since this is my only answer.
xo_lola_xo
Proud Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2007
- Messages
- 12,805
- Points
- 0
Straight but I defend homosexuality at every chance I can get because I defend love.
kissybissy
Proud Member
Straight. Nothing against gays, be yourself, be happy, love is the answer.
suzynyc
Proud Member
I'm straight and although I don't understand what it's like to be gay or bi I don't judge and want them to have the same rights that all human beings should be entitled to have. Was very proud when same sex marriage bill was finally passed recently in NY.
LindavG
Proud Member
I was surprised to hear that NY hadn't legalized gay marriage before, I always thought NY was quite liberal and had a strong gay rights movement. Anyway, it's great to see more and more places recognizing gay rights. Personally, I'm proud that my country was the first in the world to legalize gay marriage, even though I am straight myself. I just support human rights in general
Word Smith Sr
Proud Member
I am straight. I do not think it'll change.
LindavG
Proud Member
I have heard this statement before but I am not sure if I believe that, tbh. Unfortunately, I have never been in love but I do know that I am entirely heterosexual, and it has nothing to do with being "conditioned" or whatever. I just don't look at girls 'that way' and never have. I can't imagine ever dating a woman. I do like female companionship but not in a romantic way. It goes against my natural feelings.. dating a woman for me would be like dating a child or a very old man.. something that is just not attractive to me personally. And if I were gay or bi, I'd be perfectly cool with it and I know my family would be too. So I know for sure that that statement does not apply to me... but maybe I am the exception to the rule
kindofdisco
Proud Member
^ But those feelings come exactly from conditioning by society. You're brought up to find only one sex attractive, through images you see on everything from tv and movies to billboards and school text books. If we were all taught from a young age that its perfectly normal to find someone of either gender attractive, I firmly believe that things would be a lot different. Society and media has a big impact on us as children.
LindavG
Proud Member
So you believe that sexual orientation is predominantly determined by environmental factors? In other words, if a child grows up in a gay household or gay environment and thus sees homosexuality as the 'norm' growing up, he is more likely to be gay when he's older? I don't believe that and there is substantial evidence to disprove that. If the environment has such a decisive impact on someone's sexual orientation, how come two people in the same family can have different preferences? I grew up in a very liberal society, where it is common for celebrities to be openly gay (heck, even the mayor of my city is gay and married to a famous presenter) and yet the % of homosexuals isn't any higher than in other countries. I believe that sexual orientation in itself is completely independent of outside factors such as the media or education, but the choice of whether or not you give into these feelings can be affected by societal pressures; not just with regard to homosexuality but to anything that is considered 'abnormal', like polygamy, paedophilia or bestiality. Please don't misinterpret this statement: I don't have anything against (sexual) relationships involving consenting adults, which is why I don't have any personal objections against homosexuality or polygamy (contrary to the other two examples that lack the element of active consent). What I am trying to say is I don't think these are 'learned' behaviours, these preferences are natural for some people and cannot be changed. That's why I do not believe people who say they have been "cured" from their homosexuality.
I am a left-handed person. We constitute around 10% of the population (coincidentally, similar to the % of homosexuals). Society is entirely dominated by right-handed people, which you will probably not notice unless you are part of that 10% minority. Basically, being left-handed is very inconvenient in today's world as nearly all products are designed for right-handed people. Furthermore, it is not very practical as it requires a lot more effort to write and paint for left-handed people due to the movement of "pushing" the pen/brush forward with your fingers rather than "pulling" it towards you with your wrist. Probably for these reasons, I was constantly encouraged when I was younger and started to learn how to write to use my right hand instead of my left. My teacher would often ask me: "Are you sure you want to write with this hand? Wouldn't you rather try the other one, like the rest of the class?" I didn't, because writing with my right hand just doesn't feel natural to me. Despite the discomfort and impracticality it brings, left-handed people have persisted to exist throughout history. You cannot choose your 'prefered hand' although you can learn to become proficient with the unnatural hand. Some people are naturally right-handed, some are left-handed and some are ambidextrous. Although the latter two are significantly less common, it doesn't mean that they are any less natural.
^ I hope you understand what I'm trying to say with this analogy
Last edited:
Severus Snape
Proud Member
kindofdisco said:
We are naturally predisposed towards the expression of heterosexual behaviour, though, for the basic biological concept of reproduction and therefore continuation of one's genes/species. Looking at it from a purely biological standpoint, homosexuality does not make sense (and neither do condoms, birth control, masturbation, or any other forms of non-reproductive sex), as it would not pass genes down or produce a child. Then again, reproduction and sexuality aren't so simple. There are species which are parthenogenetic, such as the lizard species known as the New Mexico Whiptail (of which no male counterpart exists). Reproduction occurs asexually in these species, however, some parthenogenetic species still engage in homosexual "mock mating."
Assuming the species does not reproduce asexually and is therefore neither hermaphroditic or parthenogenetic, however, the predisposition would be towards heterosexual mating with reproduction as the objective. With that said, there are a lot of animal species which display homosexual tendencies, among them swans, several primates including homo sapiens, of course, dolphins, lions, etc. Rams are even capable of being exclusively homosexual. There are also species which engage in non-reproductive mating, the most famous one of these (besides humans) being dolphins.
In regards to human sexuality, the development of the Kinsey sexual orientation scale in the late 1940s helped organize human sexual preference by providing more grey areas than the previously held black and white "straight" or "gay" orientations. The scale is as follows:
Kinsey scale said:
I think it's fair to say that the majority of people would fall under 1-2, with the second majority being 4-5. This would, of course, make them technically bisexual, but not in the sense in which we often think of it (i.e. equally attracted to both sexes). Very few people (percentage wise) would identify as exclusively hetero/homosexual or perfectly bisexual. The reason for this, I think, would probably be a combination of the aforementioned biological drive for reproduction (encouraging hetero sex), and the pleasant sensations which "relations" bring about especially in social animals (encouraging non-reproductive sex). There is also something to be said regarding brain chemistry and its influence upon a person's sexual orientation (I would reckon this would be more of a factor in exclusive hetero/homosexuals).
With that said, I'm not sure cultural conditioning accounts for people feeling the way they do. I think you have a point in that cultural conditioning discourages the expression of homosexual behaviour and feelings of attraction for one's gender (especially in cultures where religion and family are most important), but as any "ex-gay" who has gone through the so-called ex-gay ministries can tell you (when they're being honest), cultural conditioning only does so much--it does not destroy or even influence their orientation, it only affects their readiness to express and acknowledge said attraction out of fear of rejection/persecution/imaginary torments at the hands of a pitchfork-wielding villain. This is the reason why exclusive/predominantly homosexual/lesbian people have existed even in the most sexually repressive pro-heterosexual cultures, and why exclusive/predominantly heterosexual people will continue to exist even if our culture chose to encourage the expression of homosexual attraction without any stigma.
This is already complex enough, and we've only discussed the socially acceptable sexual orientations! We haven't even stepped into the territory of paraphilias, or asexuality. In short: sexuality--it's complicated.
Last edited:
kindofdisco
Proud Member
So you believe that sexual orientation is predominantly determined by environmental factors? In other words, if a child grows up in a gay household or gay environment and thus sees homosexuality as the 'norm' growing up, he is more likely to be gay when he's older? I don't believe that and there is substantial evidence to disprove that. If the environment has such a decisive impact on someone's sexual orientation, how come two people in the same family can have different preferences? I grew up in a very liberal society, where it is common for celebrities to be openly gay (heck, even the mayor of my city is gay and married to a famous presenter) and yet the % of homosexuals isn't any higher than in other countries. I believe that sexual orientation in itself is completely independent of outside factors such as the media or education, but the choice of whether or not you give into these feelings can be affected by societal pressures; not just with regard to homosexuality but to anything that is considered 'abnormal', like polygamy, paedophilia or bestiality. Please don't misinterpret this statement: I don't have anything against (sexual) relationships involving consenting adults, which is why I don't have any personal objections against homosexuality or polygamy (contrary to the other two examples that lack the element of active consent). What I am trying to say is I don't think these are 'learned' behaviours, these preferences are natural for some people and cannot be changed. That's why I do not believe people who say they have been "cured" from their homosexuality.
I am a left-handed person. We constitute around 10% of the population (coincidentally, similar to the % of homosexuals). Society is entirely dominated by right-handed people, which you will probably not notice unless you are part of that 10% minority. Basically, being left-handed is very inconvenient in today's world as nearly all products are designed for right-handed people. Furthermore, it is not very practical as it requires a lot more effort to write and paint for left-handed people due to the movement of "pushing" the pen/brush forward with your fingers rather than "pulling" it towards you with your wrist. Probably for these reasons, I was constantly encouraged when I was younger and started to learn how to write to use my right hand instead of my left. My teacher would often ask me: "Are you sure you want to write with this hand? Wouldn't you rather try the other one, like the rest of the class?" I didn't, because writing with my right hand just doesn't feel natural to me. Despite the discomfort and impracticality it brings, left-handed people have persisted to exist throughout history. You cannot choose your 'prefered hand' although you can learn to become proficient with the unnatural hand. Some people are naturally right-handed, some are left-handed and some are ambidextrous. Although the latter two are significantly less common, it doesn't mean that they are any less natural.
^ I hope you understand what I'm trying to say with this analogy
If somebody told you to jump off a bridge, would you do it? I dislike it when people apply the "extreme situation" to their argument, because it really doesn't prove anything at all.
I do honestly believe that society plays a big part in how we feel about other people. If a child is brought up with images in their books, on their tv shows and perhaps things they see at Kindergarten or Preschool, that predominately feature a man and a woman as the ideal "relationship" or what is "normal", of course they're going to be conditioned to believe that that is what is going to happen to them later in life. I come from an extremely liberal family as well, but I was never given any images of homosexual couples and told that was okay. I honestly remember growing up and thinking that a "gay" person was somebody who dressed in drag or was overtly feminine, and that was about it. I had no idea that these people had the same relationships as my parents or others around me. I just wasn't taught that it was as normal as a man and woman loving each other. Because of that, any feelings I had for girls when I was a pre-teen/teenager I kind of squashed to the back of my mind. I didn't think it was a viable path to take, and I sure as heck didn't think that any girls would return my feelings.
I firmly believe that while people can argue that some are born to be attracted to a certain sex, a big part of it is to do with the environment we grow up in. Yes, if a child grows up with homosexual parents of course they're going to believe that its okay to love someone of their own sex, but it doesn't mean that they WILL. It however gives them the OPTION, it says to them that yup, this is as normal and as functioning as any other set of parents of the kids they go to school with. Do you see what I'm saying?
I happen to be left handed myself and I find your analogy sort of redundant. While people of my parent's generation were forced to write with their right hand just like those who had feelings for people of the same sex weren't allowed to partake in those relationships, I really think the similarities end there. The hand you write with doesn't determine how you live your life. The person you share your life with does.
Also, I just want to add that your:
I hope you understand what I'm trying to say with this analogy
Comes off as condescending to me. Just because you type a wall of text doesn't make your argument any stronger or better than mine. I simply like to keep things short and to the point.
Prince Of Pop
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 3,325
- Points
- 83
I'm straight. I don't particularly care for the homosexual life, but I have no problems with them. I have a couple friends who are either bi or gay, and it's ok.....just don't expect me to become involved in that lifestyle.
I do believe they should have as much rights as heterosexuals.
I do believe they should have as much rights as heterosexuals.
Severus Snape
Proud Member
You seem to be attempting to back up your statements with subjective/personal experience, which in and of itself is irrelevant to the world at large, and ill suited to serve as evidence to back up a thesis/point in a logical argument. However, it does provide good insight into how our society skews our understanding of homosexuality and our view of homosexual relationships, so that those who do identify with a bisexual/homosexual sexual orientation feel forced to hide this. It does not mean that society conditions people to be heterosexual--it encourages heterosexual sexual expression, however, there is no way to make actual sexual orientation compulsory, as evidenced by your inability to eliminate your attraction to your own gender. Like I said, homosexuals and lesbians, both exclusive and predominant, have always existed, even among the most intolerant cultures, so exclusive/predominant heterosexuals will exist even if we were to completely reverse the roles and place them in a culture which was intolerant of heterosexuality. They would just hide it.
I don't think presenting homosexual couples in the same way as heterosexual couples would increase the number of actual exclusive/predominant homosexuals, or perfect bisexuals. I think the majority of people would still be predominantly heterosexual--the only thing presenting such couples in culture would achieve is sending a statement to LGBTQ individuals that there is nothing unnatural about homosexuality, something I would readily support. It would therefore increase the expression of previously repressed sexual behaviour among already homosexual individuals, however, it would not change the fact that most people identify as predominantly heterosexual.
kindofdisco
Proud Member
I am not a scholar, or a teacher or a professor. Of course I would back up my argument with personal experiences, because we are having a conversation here, not a high-level debate. And I'd appreciate it if you were a little more friendly and didn't stomp all over everything with your apparent high-level of intelligence. It's really not an attractive quality, and turns me off from wanting to continue this lively and interesting conversation.
However, I will ask you for proof that humans are "born" with their preferred sexuality. Because I have never seen anything solid in relation to that, I believe that we are born a blank canvas and develop based on our surroundings and what we are exposed to.
However, I will ask you for proof that humans are "born" with their preferred sexuality. Because I have never seen anything solid in relation to that, I believe that we are born a blank canvas and develop based on our surroundings and what we are exposed to.
Roosje
Proud Member
Beautifully said. I agree. Love is what it's all about.
I'm married to my third boyfriend, but previously I kissed a girl and I liked it. I think girls are beautiful.
I truly do not understand people who are opposed to gayness. It's as incomprehensible as being racist to me. We are all people, what does it matter who we love or what we look like? I just can't grasp hate towards a certain group of people without actually knowing them. Love should be the priority in life.
SamChip1988
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 99
- Points
- 8
Hazard
Proud Member
I am straight and I defend homosexuality because I want everyone to be happy. I don't defend homosexuality because of love. Remember love doesn't have to be sexual. A man can love another man and a woman can love another woman because it does not mean that they need to have a sexual relationship with each other.
Severus Snape
Proud Member
Neither am I.
kindofdisco said:
I wasn't meaning to look down on you at all--all I was saying is that it's hard to buy your argument if you provide no objective backing for it.
kindofdisco said:
Well, we're not born completely "blank" canvases. This much can be observed by analyzing genes and brain chemistry (i.e. mental illness being genetic).
This article tells of a fascinating study: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7456588.stm
BBC News Conclusion Paragraph said:
Here is another interesting article: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002340883_gayscience19m.html
Of course, as you point out, homosexuality being exclusively genetic has not been conclusively proven without the shadow of a doubt, however--the evidence which has been found through these studies strongly suggests a correlation between homosexuality and genetic factors, all taking place before birth. Therefore, it is much more probable that homosexuality has genetic origins than it being a learned behaviour, thus, social "conditioning" would have no impact in its existence.
Like I said previously, presenting your hypotheses as fact and backing them up with subjective experiences doesn't really do much for them. The problem I have is that you seem to be making very broad/general statements (previously, I think you said you thought everyone was born bi but society conditions them towards heterosexual unions or something) and providing little more than personal experience to justify this view. Had you strictly talked about your experience, it would have been perfectly conversational, as you intended it to be, it seems. However, by making such statements, you've placed the burden of proof upon yourself.
I don't particularly care for friendliness--I prefer neutrality. Moreover, I didn't stomp over what you said--in fact, I said that your personal experiences provided a valuable viewpoint in regards to how society conditions us to discourage the expression of homosexual behaviour--so, I actually agreed with you in that society has a role in providing positive/negative feedback regarding the expression of homosexual behaviour. They would provide suitable and indeed relevant support had your argument been that, but they do not provide proper support for an argument that everyone is born bisexual, and some people (i.e. LindaVG) do not find homosexual relationships appealing because of "social conditioning."
By all means, continue on with this thread. Don't get defensive just because someone doesn't agree with what you're saying--we all contribute something of value at the end of the day.
claudiadoina
Proud Member
I am straight .
I don't have a clear opinion about homosexuality yet so I can't share any thoughts on this matter.
I'd rather avoid the subject because I think I am a bit consevative.
It's not the love that bothers me it's the sex.
I don't have a clear opinion about homosexuality yet so I can't share any thoughts on this matter.
I'd rather avoid the subject because I think I am a bit consevative.
It's not the love that bothers me it's the sex.
Last edited:
Severus Snape
Proud Member
How is it any more disgusting than its heterosexual counterpart?
TBH, I think the least disgusting "relations" are between lesbians. Really, though, anything that involves people's privates, whether male or female, is just blech!
uke:LindavG
Proud Member
First of all, I don't quite understand why you are being so hostile. I thought we were having a civil conversation. I never claimed to have any "proof" for my opinion, which I why I used the words I think or I believe a lot. You're the one who puts forward such a definitive argument (all people are born bi-sexual and those who think they are straight have been conditioned to feel that way) without offering any evidence to back it up. I don't think my example was extreme at all. You claim that people lose their interest in the same gender (i.e. go from bi to hetero) due to the fact that they are almost exclusively exposed to heterosexuality when they are growing up. So, the alternative is a case where a child grows up in a homosexual environment, right? According to your argument, these children would be more likely to retain their interest in the same gender, as homosexuality is the 'norm' for them growing up. However, there is substantial evidence that this claim is false. Children who grow up in homosexual households are not more likely to be gay as they are older, nor is there a difference between the % of homosexuals in very liberal societies (such as the NL) vs. more socially conservative societies (such as the US).
Of course, I agree.
I am not sure at what age children become aware of their sexual preference. I assume it will be around the age where puberty kicks in but I can't be sure. Anyway, I would slightly change your sentence and say that "...of course they're going to be conditioned to believe that that is what should happen to them later in life." In that sense, people are certainly conditioned. We learn from an early age that it is 'normal' to be heterosexual and in many cultures homosexuality is considered sinful and wrong. However, I do not believe that sexual orientation can be conditioned or changed by environmental factors. I believe it is given, it's a natural fact. Gay people exist even in the most repressive regimes where homosexuality is punished by death. I think the sense of sexual orientation in human beings is so strong that it cannot be ignored or conditioned. One can tell himself that he is heterosexual, but in the back of his mind he knows he is bi/gay. The only choice we have is to express or suppress our sexual preferences.
The first part of your anecdote (regarding your former perception of homosexuals) is clearly an example of societal conditioning and I think most people can relate to it. However, I do not believe this is what caused the feelings you could've had for girls to be squashed. If you genuinely felt sexually attracted to the same gender, this feeling would have been too strong to just forget about.
Of course I see what you're saying. But the fact remains that even when these children learn from an early age that homosexuality is as normal and functioning as heterosexuality, they are not more likely to be gay. How do you explain this?
Of course, I'm not saying that being left-handed is as serious as being gay
But I actually think it makes a nice analogy. As you said, in the past left-handed people were forced to write with their right hand. My aunt is naturally left-handed but was conditioned to write with her right hand, and now she is able to use her right hand so well that you can't even tell it doesn't come naturally. Still, if you asked her, she would tell you she is left-handed. This reminds me of homosexuals that have been conditioned to engage in heterosexual relationships. They can pretend to be straight and seem sincere, but deep down they know they are gay. Also, the fact that left-handed people weren't allowed to write with their left hand in the past did not mean that left-handed people didn't exist back then. They just didn't express their natural instincts. Just like oppressive societies (e.g. in certain parts of the Middle East) may not allow homosexual activity, but that does not mean homosexuals do not exist in that part of the world. They just suppress their natural instincts. Well, it wasn't intended to be condescending at all. I just wondered if you understood what I was getting at with the comparison to left-handed people as I indeed tend to write a lot of text and the main point might get lost in the middle. The fact that you took the analogy literally tells me you didn't quite get what I meant.