suzynyc
Proud Member
That's also true.
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
That's also true.
I'd say that's fair or safe to say. It's the same way for California. Although the state in general is rather gay friendly, there are highly conservative areas (usually white rich folk areas) which is why gay marriage is still an ongoing battle. So silly why straight people think gays marrying one another will somehow tarnish the act or hurt them personally. So stupid! Heterosexuals have been slapping marriage in the face for millennia, might as well let gay people in on the fun too!
this might help someone else that is why its called a discussion board
I believe people do exist that aren't particularly attracted to anyone, but I also think some of the types that feel this do so because of low self esteem and thinking that no one would possibly like/love them or be attracted, etc. That's my personal take. I've known types like that. Hell, I used to be one! For the longest time I claimed to not care about sex or being with anyone at all, but deep down I just didn't think I could be loved. It wasn't until age 26 that love found me and changed my mind. Again, I'm not denying the existence of asexuality but I do believe that some part of it extends from lack of self esteem. That's my personal opinion and I don't mean to offend anyone. I'm not saying this applies to you personally.
CaptainEoLove85
Proud Member
Thanks for admitting this because I am too, and not many people understand it. Actually the only person I find myself sexually attracted to is in fact MJ :blush: but I know that's mostly a fantasy thing.
Ashtanga
Proud Member
:shifty:
earthlyme
Proud Member
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,066
- Points
- 63
I'm straight... Support gay/Lesbians/Bi... I mean we're all human...who cares who we spend our intimate times with? Some are ignorant...my family is against it... My sis is for it too... I think my friend is Bi but i'm sure she'll be more comfortable to tell me after a while...
L.o.v.e.
Romi
I mean we're all human...who cares who we spend our intimate times with? Some are ignorant...my family is against it... My sis is for it too... I think my friend is Bi but i'm sure she'll be more comfortable to tell me after a while... L.o.v.e.
Romi
Severus Snape
Proud Member
I wouldn't think so--people whose "asexuality" (technically celibacy) originated from such thoughts and feelings obviously would not be true asexuals. They'd be celibates, choosing not to partake in sexual activity instead of genuinely having no desire to do so--so basically, they'd be in the same boat as Catholic priests and other people who abstain from sex but have sexual urges. These people will try to tell themselves there's more to life than sex, etc. but the urges and sexual attraction will always be there--so they would not be asexual at all, nor should they count as such.
Asexuality is very rare, however, it does exist. There are even long-term relationship/married couples who are asexual, but who identify with each other on other levels such as friendship, etc. and develop a form of non-sexual but deep "love" attachment (I would reckon this would be similar to the love one feels for a pet, a friend, or a sibling). Asexuals compose 1% of the population, 1 in 100 people, as cited by a 2004 study conducted at Brock University (Ontario, Canada) by Anthony Bogaert. It is important to note that other studies have shown a range in number, however, the percentage is still pretty low. Your example of an individual who would identify as "asexual" but really is terrified of sex out of low self-esteem would still partake in masturbation (no danger of rejection there), which asexuals engage in either at a lower level than non-asexuals, or completely fail to partake in it at all. Therefore, the prevalence of auto-erotic activity in sexually interested parties as opposed to the lower numbers of asexuals who masturbate would completely tear the "low self-esteem" hypothesis to shreds, as masturbation requires no outside being to "accept" one. Asexuals also exhibit lower levels of arousal (sexual stimulus), which would not be a controllable behaviour. There are conditions under which sexual arousal can decline (certain medications such as antidepressants, aging, etc.), however, the desire would have had to be present in the first place if a decline is to be noticed. If it was weak or nonexistent to begin with, no decline exists, as it would be a plateau of sexual repulsion, lol.
However, I will say you're on to something when you say asexuals can suffer from low self-esteem and depression. However, the conclusion you've drawn is the converse of what actually occurs. Low self-esteem is not a cause for asexuality, but rather, it is the opposite. Generally, the less accepted a certain group is, the more self-image issues they tend to have (we are wired to seek approval from our kin, aka society, and model our behaviour accordingly). If someone deviates from the standard, one is looked at with disapproval, so in a way asexuals are the most misunderstood people in the world. Sex is such a chemically satisfying experience (reproduction is encouraged by making sex a rewarding experience, this is especially true of social animals such as humans) that most people could not imagine why someone would not want to have sex. Therefore, the more the orientation deviates from the norm (heterosexuality), the more self-esteem issues seem to arise.
A study by Paula Nurius published in The Journal of Sex Research in 1983 found that 25.88% of heterosexuals, 26.54% bisexuals, 29.88% of homosexuals, and 33.57% of asexuals had significant self-image issues. Since depression goes hand-in-hand with self-image issues a lot of the time, one can imagine this is also an issue. Of course, this all derives from societal intolerance/lack of understanding towards orientations which deviate completely from the status quo. Therefore, depression/low self-esteem is caused by society's reaction to asexuality, it does not cause it.
Rams are our friends in this example as well. Here is a table showing male-oriented rams' reactions to both male and female stimulus, and asexual rams' reactions to the same:
http://www.biolreprod.org/content/67/1/263/T1.expansion.html
As you can see, the ?? rams showed no sexual reaction when presented with ewe stimulus, but showed markedly high reactions in comparison when presented with ram stimulus. Asexual rams, on the other hand, showed pretty much nonexistent sexual reactions to both ewe and ram stimulus. Therefore, asexuality does exist in the animal kingdom--this is basically the way asexuality would present itself in humans. Study is by Charles E. Roselli et al. for Biology of Reproduction journal. It was conducted in 2002.
Additionally, other forms of sexual abstinence, such as erotophobia would also be different from asexuality, as asexuality is lack of interest in partaking in sex, whereas the former is a fear of engaging in these activities and therefore would not count as true asexuality. Like I said in previous posts, sexuality is complicated, and we've only covered the mostly socially acceptable/tolerable ones. =|
I once saw a very interesting documentary on the BBC regarding asexuality. I will see if I can find it on YouTube and post it here.
Last edited:
CaptainEoLove85
Proud Member
^great post. Hope you find the documentary. That would be interesting to watch.
Severus Snape
Proud Member
I couldn't find the documentary on YouTube. That's not surprising--the copyright monsters have been making rounds there ever since Google bought it. I couldn't find anything on the BBC site either, in the form of a documentary--but I am pretty much certain I saw the documentary in question on the BBC, as the Discovery Channel has pretty much ceased to make documentaries lol.
I did, however, find some good info. on the BBC web page, when I went scouting for the doc. It's pretty much everything I said in my post, but probably put in better terms: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A4455263
I also could not find any actual docs on YouTube, BBC or otherwise, which dealt with the subject. I think that's a testament to how far we've yet to go in regards to understanding human sexuality. There are tons of documentaries about sex, which encompass predominantly non-deviant heterosexual sex habits (meaning no fetishes, paraphilias, etc.), although there are a fair bit of documentaries aimed at understanding non-deviant homosexuality (same criteria). However, anything else barely gets a mention.
I did find this, though:
This is a short film in which asexuals discuss living their lives in a world where sexual attraction is overwhelmingly predominant, and sex (in everything from commercials, music, film, etc.) is constantly targeted as being desirable and normal. The film's title is: "Life in a Sex Vacuum."
I did, however, find some good info. on the BBC web page, when I went scouting for the doc. It's pretty much everything I said in my post, but probably put in better terms: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A4455263
I also could not find any actual docs on YouTube, BBC or otherwise, which dealt with the subject. I think that's a testament to how far we've yet to go in regards to understanding human sexuality. There are tons of documentaries about sex, which encompass predominantly non-deviant heterosexual sex habits (meaning no fetishes, paraphilias, etc.), although there are a fair bit of documentaries aimed at understanding non-deviant homosexuality (same criteria). However, anything else barely gets a mention.
I did find this, though:
This is a short film in which asexuals discuss living their lives in a world where sexual attraction is overwhelmingly predominant, and sex (in everything from commercials, music, film, etc.) is constantly targeted as being desirable and normal. The film's title is: "Life in a Sex Vacuum."
First you would have to know a male who is single as well as either gay or bi.
suzynyc
Proud Member
Gay Marriage Begins In New York (PHOTOS)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/24/gay-marriage-begins-in-ne_n_908120.html
Gay couples have started marrying in New York City today, the first day same-sex marriage is legal in New York state.
Family, friends and gay marriage supporters gathered at the Manhattan office of the city clerk this morning as an anticipated 823 couples planned to tie the knot across the city.
Judges waived a mandatory 24-hour waiting period that allowed couples to exchange vows moments after receiving their licenses, the Associated Press reports.
A few same-sex couples across the state performed their nuptials at the stroke of midnight.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/24/gay-marriage-begins-in-ne_n_908120.html
Gay couples have started marrying in New York City today, the first day same-sex marriage is legal in New York state.
Family, friends and gay marriage supporters gathered at the Manhattan office of the city clerk this morning as an anticipated 823 couples planned to tie the knot across the city.
Judges waived a mandatory 24-hour waiting period that allowed couples to exchange vows moments after receiving their licenses, the Associated Press reports.
A few same-sex couples across the state performed their nuptials at the stroke of midnight.
Jackson Rules
Proud Member
- Joined
- May 31, 2010
- Messages
- 913
- Points
- 28
I'm totally straight. Women are my passion
mjitalian_russianboy
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 483
- Points
- 18
I'm totally straight. Women are my passion
Yeah me too xD But I dunno why I always lose my love everytime I say the word "Love" to that girl....
Ashtanga
Proud Member
:shifty:
Just BE YOURSELF and if its MEANT TO BE... It'll happen... LOVE can't be FORCED... If the SPARK is there in you both... You'll make Magic...
Just TRUST that 'gut' feeling...
Me? I'm straight though I've been a Tomboy for years and NOW I'm 'switching' over to B-character mode...
Blame the characters in my head babbling me to story I should write :tease:
I don't really like the labels too... Its the TLC that counts and the MAGIC... NOT what gender you are in this is 'man-womanmade' world
You're welcome. I am so happy to know that there in an MJ fan who is asexual too. You are the first I've heard of. Have you ever met an asexual in person? I have been attending ACE meetings in my city, but as far as I know such meet ups happen all over the world in various cities at various dates and times: http://www.asexuality.org/en/index.php?/forum/12-meetup-mart/ I believe you have to be registered to post though.
There are numerous blogs and websites on asexuality and the best known in AVEN, an organization that provides some kind of education network on the topic. http://www.asexuality.org
I was surprised by Severus Snape post because I expected the usual: "yeah, right" or "not possible". Thanks.
Severus Snape
Proud Member
Human sexuality or lack thereof is scientific. It is not some wishy-washy concept like "love," therefore, I'd be mental to say asexuality is not possible.
Human sexuality or lack thereof is scientific. It is not some wishy-washy concept like "love," therefore, I'd be mental to say asexuality is not possible.
Love isn't a wishy-washy concept. It's very real. It comes in all forms and is a beautiful thing. It's part of what makes us us.
Severus Snape
Proud Member
"Love" is an illusory concept which was, in its pinnacle, glorified by the romantic movement in the 19th century. Stripping it all down to the nuts and bolts, to its very core, all you've got are chemical reactions, no different from the ones you would get by doing cocaine--nothing deemed "love", as we know it, truly exists. It is a fancy, a trifle, a fantasy. Sex exists--it is essential for reproduction. Attachments exist, among social animals, anyway. However, "love" as we would prefer to think of it does not exist.
The emotions we associate with romantic "love" are truly mechanisms to ensure the survival of children--in other words, the "attachment" forms to ensure the successful passing of one's genes in the form of offspring develop into adulthood with minimal complication. Most animal species, including social animals such as primates, are polygamous. They are not meant to mate "for life" as are, for example, swans and some other members of the avian species. Even then, the reason some bird species form long-term attachments has nothing to do with "love." It has perfectly rational biological explanations:
The "attachment" humans form with each other has similar reasons--especially when considering the fact that human infants are among the slowest animal species to mature into adulthood--it takes the human child about 12 years to reach puberty. By this time, most cats, dogs, rats, mice, and other such animals are dead. Therefore, it is in the young's best interest for his parents to remain together for as long as it takes for it to mature, as we are social animals and actively raise our children (unlike turtles and most reptiles, who really have the right idea about raising children--that is, tossing them aside the minute they come out, lol). Since we became a hunter-gatherer species, it is likely that this became biologically ingrained into our brains for the purpose of averting danger and ensuring survival of the species (the father hunts for food and protects from predators, the mother ensures the children do not wander off and become lost or are eaten, etc.)
This Yahoo article briefly explains the brain chemistry behind the chemical reactions we associate with "love": http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/sex/researchers-examine-the-science-of-falling-in-love-635812/
As you can see, nothing of the sort really exists. Those reactions have a rhyme and reason--to propagate the species and ensure human survival, and that is all. There is no "true" love or any of that unscientific hogwash involved.
The emotions we associate with romantic "love" are truly mechanisms to ensure the survival of children--in other words, the "attachment" forms to ensure the successful passing of one's genes in the form of offspring develop into adulthood with minimal complication. Most animal species, including social animals such as primates, are polygamous. They are not meant to mate "for life" as are, for example, swans and some other members of the avian species. Even then, the reason some bird species form long-term attachments has nothing to do with "love." It has perfectly rational biological explanations:
wild-bird-watching.com said:
The "attachment" humans form with each other has similar reasons--especially when considering the fact that human infants are among the slowest animal species to mature into adulthood--it takes the human child about 12 years to reach puberty. By this time, most cats, dogs, rats, mice, and other such animals are dead. Therefore, it is in the young's best interest for his parents to remain together for as long as it takes for it to mature, as we are social animals and actively raise our children (unlike turtles and most reptiles, who really have the right idea about raising children--that is, tossing them aside the minute they come out, lol). Since we became a hunter-gatherer species, it is likely that this became biologically ingrained into our brains for the purpose of averting danger and ensuring survival of the species (the father hunts for food and protects from predators, the mother ensures the children do not wander off and become lost or are eaten, etc.)
This Yahoo article briefly explains the brain chemistry behind the chemical reactions we associate with "love": http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/sex/researchers-examine-the-science-of-falling-in-love-635812/
As you can see, nothing of the sort really exists. Those reactions have a rhyme and reason--to propagate the species and ensure human survival, and that is all. There is no "true" love or any of that unscientific hogwash involved.
Severus Snape
Proud Member
^Thank you. Human sexuality and the reasons for it are truly fascinating. Like I said, we've only touched the tip of the iceberg with that one...I think there is much left to be discovered, discussed, explored, etc.
I absolutely respect everything you've said and don't all together disagree with it. However, I also find it very cold and saddening. It sort of makes me feel bad for you because I can't help but assume that you haven't felt the warmth of true love. Why? Because if you have, you most likely wouldn't be asserting such a clinical view of human emotion and relationships. I really don't mean to offend, but at the same time I did find your equivalence of love to an illusion slightly offensive. It belittles my own relationship. So, even though I can agree with certain points, not everything can be explained away by science. Some things just are and I believe the love we feel for one another is one of those things. Just like a miracle - all the science in the world can't explain it. Some people wake from comas and others don't. There's not a rhyme or reason to everything. I love my husband more than life itself and I would die for him, as he would for me. Call it romanticism or say we're brainwashed - but I call it love and I don't need a scientific explanation that denounces what we have as nothing more than "nuts and bolts". Thanks.
Last edited:
Well, Travis :clap: YOU have met 'prince charming' then... Treasure him... as I understand Severus Snape...
My 'prince charming' has lost his way... was too stubborn to ask for directions and so got burnt to a crisp by the dragon he met LOL...
My 'prince charming' has lost his way... was too stubborn to ask for directions and so got burnt to a crisp by the dragon he met LOL...
CaptainEoLove85
Proud Member
I'm a member of AVEN and I used to post there a long time ago, but not anymore.
Ashtanga
Proud Member
:lol:
Severus Snape
Proud Member
Believe as you will, however, science holds the most concrete answers. There's a difference between understanding the way things work and choosing to believe a universally baseless fancy (meaning, it might hold all the meaning in the world to one person, but is inconsequential and of no importance to the world at large).
Let's not even make it about love--it could be anything, really--for example, the manifestation of rainbows, which interestingly enough was deemed a miracle/supernaturally significant event in the times of long-ago. Some people believed (some still do) that god(s) made rainbows either to serve as: a pathway between this world and the next (Norse), as omens (Greeks), or as the symbol of a promise (Christianity). However, the true explanation for how and why rainbows come about has nothing to do with sky deities, and everything to do with science (in this case, refraction).
Why did I conjure such a situation? To serve as an understandable example that there is a drastic difference from what is believed to be and what actually is. However, like I said, believe as you will. Interestingly enough, rainbows, like the concept of love, are an illusion.
As for your relationship--well, I never said anything about it, so I don't see how or why you would find my reasoning to be offensive. You choose whether to embrace or discard my information, whether to apply it directly to your relationship or view it as someone's view of the general human-invented concept called love. Regardless of what I say, your views towards that person won't change, so why should you find it to be offensive? All I said is that "love" is unscientific and more fit to be found within the pages of some 19th century fancy novel--this neither validates nor discredits your or anybody else's human attachments. Only you have the power to do that.
As for people waking up from comas--that has less to do with anything one would deem a "miracle" and more to do with whatever put them in a coma to begin with, and the kinds of treatments the doctors provided for them. The human body, under certain circumstances, must "go under" in order to prevent further damage to itself--a comatose state would ensure the most basic functioning of the brain, arguably among the most important organs.
HowStuffWorks.com said:
A real amazing feat would be to have someone wake from a coma without the doctors' interference, after an extensive amount of time. Then, and only then, you may deem it a miracle. Until then, it's all science.
It suffices to say I don't believe in miracles. As for the warmth of "true love," I don't need it. Thanks anyway.
When life gives you a failed prince, you make him a fried prince a la KFC. Finger-lickin' good!
Colonel Sander's Fried Prince Recipe:
-1 Failed Prince (roast/fry via dragon, preferably in a gladiator-style setting, as you watch from the Caesar's spot, whilst feasting on grapes)
-1/2 cup Cole Slaw
-1/4 cup Mashed Potatoes
-2 tbsp. Gravy
-3/4 cup broken hopes and dreams (optional)
-Bread Crumbs
-A generously sized slice of German chocolate cake and a bottle of vodka to celebrate the demise of that fiend (mandatory).
Last edited:
Believe as you will, however, science holds the most concrete answers. There's a difference between understanding the way things work and choosing to believe a universally baseless fancy (meaning, it might hold all the meaning in the world to one person, but is inconsequential and of no importance to the world at large).
Let's not even make it about love--it could be anything, really--for example, the manifestation of rainbows, which interestingly enough was deemed a miracle/supernaturally significant event in the times of long-ago. Some people believed (some still do) that god(s) made rainbows either to serve as: a pathway between this world and the next (Norse), as omens (Greeks), or as the symbol of a promise (Christianity). However, the true explanation for how and why rainbows come about has nothing to do with sky deities, and everything to do with science (in this case, refraction).
Why did I conjure such a situation? To serve as an understandable example that there is a drastic difference from what is believed to be and what actually is. However, like I said, believe as you will. Interestingly enough, rainbows, like the concept of love, are an illusion.
As for your relationship--well, I never said anything about it, so I don't see how or why you would find my reasoning to be offensive. You choose whether to embrace or discard my information, whether to apply it directly to your relationship or view it as someone's view of the general human-invented concept called love. Regardless of what I say, your views towards that person won't change, so why should you find it to be offensive? All I said is that "love" is unscientific and more fit to be found within the pages of some 19th century fancy novel--this neither validates nor discredits your or anybody else's human attachments. Only you have the power to do that.
As for people waking up from comas--that has less to do with anything one would deem a "miracle" and more to do with whatever put them in a coma to begin with, and the kinds of treatments the doctors provided for them. The human body, under certain circumstances, must "go under" in order to prevent further damage to itself--a comatose state would ensure the most basic functioning of the brain, arguably among the most important organs.
A real amazing feat would be to have someone wake from a coma without the doctors' interference, after an extensive amount of time. Then, and only then, you may deem it a miracle. Until then, it's all science.
It suffices to say I don't believe in miracles. As for the warmth of "true love," I don't need it. Thanks anyway.
When life gives you a failed prince, you make him a fried prince a la KFC. Finger-lickin' good!
Colonel Sander's Fried Prince Recipe:
-1 Failed Prince (roast/fry via dragon, preferably in a gladiator-style setting, as you watch from the Caesar's spot, whilst feasting on grapes)
-1/2 cup Cole Slaw
-1/4 cup Mashed Potatoes
-2 tbsp. Gravy
-3/4 cup broken hopes and dreams (optional)
-Bread Crumbs
-A generously sized slice of German chocolate cake and a bottle of vodka to celebrate the demise of that fiend (mandatory).
*sigh*
I firmly stand by the fact that not everything can be explained in a scientific manner. There will always be unknown variables in life that cannot be dissected or even seen by the human eye, telescope, or any other gadget. And yes, I will continue to believe what I know about love to be true and real because I feel it in my heart and soul. And let me guess, souls don't exist because science can't prove so? I can't live life in such a cold and calculating manner. I refuse to boil down the love of my life to nothing more than some bit of leftover human evolution. I think science is amazingly wonderful and interesting, but not when it's used to discredit something so dear to my heart. You may not believe in true love, but I do. You'll have to respect that just as I'll respect your choice to only believe in things you can get in writing.
Last edited: