|
|
Post by chrisfan on Mar 8, 2006 21:48:25 GMT -5
YES, I've been with a woman! And IT WAS A CHOICE!!!! And there's nothing wrong with it!!! And that's my whole argument - who cares if it's a choice or genetic or something in between, if it's not wrong to begin with?? Cheers, MHow many pages of posts attempting to give Melon hell weren't all that effective. And there, just like that, without attempting to, Mary does it!  Great post upthread about the relevance of the choice argument Mary! |
|
|
|
Post by limitdeditionlayla on Mar 8, 2006 21:50:05 GMT -5
No human behaviour is strictly dichotomous, most certainly not sexual ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Mar 8, 2006 21:52:46 GMT -5
Oh, Rocky... jeez.... if all you want to know is whether or not I've been with a woman, then you don't need to go to Rome for that!!!! YES, I've been with a woman! And IT WAS A CHOICE!!!! And there's nothing wrong with it!!! And that's my whole argument - who cares if it's a choice or genetic or something in between, if it's not wrong to begin with?? That's awesome, but short of a lot of the details I was hoping for...I guess I'll just have to fill them in myself. This is probably way more fun for me than it is for you, Mary. Sorry. Really, I am. |
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Mar 8, 2006 21:57:38 GMT -5
Here you all are having a very serious discussion and I keep popping in to be a 12 year old boy. But it's just so damn fun sometimes...
In a very silly mood and I don't know why.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Mar 8, 2006 21:57:45 GMT -5
do you consider paedophilia a sexual preference? I don't know. I'm not trying to cop out here, but I don't really know what you have in mind when you say "sexual preference" so I'm scared that my answer will be misinterpreted as extremely offensive. All I can say is this: I think pedophiles never CHOSE to find children sexually attractive. Beyond this, I have no idea why they find children sexually attractive - I don't know if it's genetic, or partially genetic, or purely the result of some life circumstance, some terrible trauma or childhood abuse or something to which they werre themselves exposed. I'm hesitant to use the term "sexual preference" in this light because the word has a benign connotation, whereas pedophilia, when acted upon, is obviously not benign. I've opened up a kettle of worms by using the pedophilia example, obviously, because it's such a loaded example (and because it's often used by homophobes in a completely unfair manner). Perhaps I should have used the example of pyromania instead. Pyromaniacs never chose to be fascinated with fire, but it's still wrong if they commit arson, because arson is in and of itself a bad thing. So the question isn't whether homosexuality is a choice or not - the question is whether it's a bad thing in and of itself - AND IT'S NOT. Does this make sense now? Cheers, M |
|
|
|
Post by limitdeditionlayla on Mar 8, 2006 22:01:44 GMT -5
Here you all are having a very serious discussion and I keep popping in to be a 12 year old boy. But it's just so damn fun sometimes... In a very silly mood and I don't know why. Boobs |
|
|
|
Post by limitdeditionlayla on Mar 8, 2006 22:10:31 GMT -5
do you consider paedophilia a sexual preference? I don't know. I'm not trying to cop out here, but I don't really know what you have in mind when you say "sexual preference" so I'm scared that my answer will be misinterpreted as extremely offensive. All I can say is this: I think pedophiles never CHOSE to find children sexually attractive. Beyond this, I have no idea why they find children sexually attractive - I don't know if it's genetic, or partially genetic, or purely the result of some life circumstance, some terrible trauma or childhood abuse or something to which they werre themselves exposed. I'm hesitant to use the term "sexual preference" in this light because the word has a benign connotation, whereas pedophilia, when acted upon, is obviously not benign. I've opened up a kettle of worms by using the pedophilia example, obviously, because it's such a loaded example (and because it's often used by homophobes in a completely unfair manner). Perhaps I should have used the example of pyromania instead. Pyromaniacs never chose to be fascinated with fire, but it's still wrong if they commit arson, because arson is in and of itself a bad thing. So the question isn't whether homosexuality is a choice or not - the question is whether it's a bad thing in and of itself - AND IT'S NOT. Does this make sense now? Cheers, MIt makes perfect sense. I was just curious as to how you personally see it - having used it as a comparison with homosexuality not being a 'choice' - is all. I am loathe to class paedophilia as anything other than a perversion, because the far majority of offendors know well that their actions are wrong, and also because many paedophiles are quick to use the term 'preference' to excuse or justify actions. anyway, thats getting off-topic. The pyromania example works. Homosexuals have as much choice in being sexually & emotionally attracted to people of the same gender as heterosexuals do being sexually & emotionally attracted to people of the opposite agenda. Thats the best example I can find. |
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Mar 8, 2006 22:54:27 GMT -5
It makes perfect sense. I was just curious as to how you personally see it - having used it as a comparison with homosexuality not being a 'choice' - is all. I am loathe to class paedophilia as anything other than a perversion, because the far majority of offendors know well that their actions are wrong, and also because many paedophiles are quick to use the term 'preference' to excuse or justify actions. Fair enough. I see pedophilia as a sexual "preference" only if by preference all we mean is a general inclination toward finding some particular thing sexually attractive. But usually I think we use the term "sexual preference" to indicate a matter of personal preference that has no real moral implications - I like tomatoes, you like potatoes, he likes fucking girls, he likes fucking guys. Obviosuly pedophilia does not belong in such a category because it has moral implications, at least when acted upon. I think I'd probably agree that it should be classified as a "perversion" - but I don't necessarily think perversions are chosen! Unfortunately for the person so afflicted, they're still wrong to act upon, even if they're not chosen. Homosexuals have as much choice in being sexually & emotionally attracted to people of the same gender as heterosexuals do being sexually & emotionally attracted to people of the opposite agenda. Absolutely 100% agree!!!!! I just think we all have more choice - or at least, more flexibility - then we sometimes think we have OK - I promise I'm done here. And Rocky, let yer imagination run wild - it's allllll true (kidding, kidding!!!) Cheers, M |
|
|
|
Post by limitdeditionlayla on Mar 8, 2006 22:58:37 GMT -5
I don't necessarily think perversions are chosen!
Totally. Your point is clear, I'm just anal about labels.
I just think we all have more choice - or at least, more flexibility - then we sometimes think we have
Who was it that said (paraphrase) "all women are three drinks away from being lesbian?"
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Mar 8, 2006 23:01:13 GMT -5
And Rocky, let yer imagination run wild... Consider it done. |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Mar 8, 2006 23:35:27 GMT -5
Who was it that said (paraphrase) "all women are three drinks away from being lesbian?"
Rocky's fertile imagination ... That's who's !!
|
|
|
|
Post by shin on Mar 8, 2006 23:36:59 GMT -5
Tell me more about your sexual proclivities, Mary...tell me alllll niiiight loooong...
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Mar 8, 2006 23:38:21 GMT -5
Tell me more about your sexual proclivities, Mary...tell me alllll niiiight loooong... Gross. |
|
|
|
Post by shin on Mar 8, 2006 23:38:49 GMT -5
I guess my frustration here is mostly just with the rigid sexual identites that both sides of this debate seem to impose on people. Maybe I've been at Berkeley waaaaaay too long, but the very idea of "gay" and "straight" as fixed identities just seems problematic to me. Considering that I was trying to put my emphasis on love and not sex....yes, yes you have been at Berkeley too long  |
|
|
|
Post by shin on Mar 8, 2006 23:39:11 GMT -5
Tell me more about your sexual proclivities, Mary...tell me alllll niiiight loooong... Gross. Whoa, how meta. |
|
