3 ms·

I don't understand what's the trouble here. You say "the people that I am attracted to are women". Hence, assuming you are a male, you are heterosexual. Nothing

by jules 13y ago

I don't understand what's the trouble here. You say "the people that I am attracted to are women". Hence, assuming you are a male, you are heterosexual. Nothing about being a heterosexual male implies that you are attracted to all women, and nothing about being a homosexual male implies that you are attracted to all males, and nothing about being a bisexual male implies that you are attracted to all males and females. Now it's certainly the case that these three words do not describe everything completely, since for instance you can have a bisexual person who is mostly attracted to females and occasionally attracted to males. That doesn't mean that the terms are useless. The terms 'alive' and 'dead' have the same problem: there is a grey area between them. Doesn't mean that those concepts are useless.

sp332 13y ago
OK, pretty much with you so far. Now I'm trying to show that the choice of whom to have sex with is not at all the same thing as the non-choice of whom to be attracted to. Even gay people have the choice not to have sex with people of the same gender, exactly the same way straight people have the choice not to have sex with people of the opposite gender.
- tommorris 13y ago
  True but obvious. What interesting implications do you think this has for the argument around either sexual orientation or discrimination? Because I can't really see one. Nutters who leave nail bombs in gay bars are still going to do so regardless of whether I choose to have sex or not. If I have a non-sexual romantic relationship with someone, and we walk through the park holding hands, I still have to worry about some crazy person coming along and being a shitbag about it. If I disclose my sexual orientation, I still have to worry about discrimination in the workplace and housing provision and so on. The issues don't go away just because one is not actively having sex.
- jules 13y ago
  Of course? Gay or straight is who you're attracted to, not who you have sex with. And this is not at all what you were saying further up in the tread? You were talking about attraction, not who you have sex with. I think everybody pretty much agrees that who you have sex with is a choice (except for the issue of whether free will exists at all). So far the evidence points to that being gay or straight, that is, who you're attracted to, is at least for the most part not a choice.
  - sp332 13y ago
    I agree there have been a lot of topics in this thread :) But my point way back up at the top is just this: If being gay is defined by who you're attracted to, and "who you're attracted to" can change, then "being gay" is probably not something hardwired into you before you are born. Correlate, sure. Not something you can consciously control, sure. But I really think it's something that must be taken on a moment-by-moment basis, not a lifetime-by-lifetime basis.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]

by jules 13y ago

sp332 13y ago

OK, pretty much with you so far. Now I'm trying to show that the choice of whom to have sex with is not at all the same thing as the non-choice of whom to be attracted to. Even gay people have the choice not to have sex with people of the same gender, exactly the same way straight people have the choice not to have sex with people of the opposite gender.

tommorris 13y ago
True but obvious. What interesting implications do you think this has for the argument around either sexual orientation or discrimination? Because I can't really see one. Nutters who leave nail bombs in gay bars are still going to do so regardless of whether I choose to have sex or not. If I have a non-sexual romantic relationship with someone, and we walk through the park holding hands, I still have to worry about some crazy person coming along and being a shitbag about it. If I disclose my sexual orientation, I still have to worry about discrimination in the workplace and housing provision and so on. The issues don't go away just because one is not actively having sex.
jules 13y ago
Of course? Gay or straight is who you're attracted to, not who you have sex with. And this is not at all what you were saying further up in the tread? You were talking about attraction, not who you have sex with. I think everybody pretty much agrees that who you have sex with is a choice (except for the issue of whether free will exists at all). So far the evidence points to that being gay or straight, that is, who you're attracted to, is at least for the most part not a choice.
- sp332 13y ago
  I agree there have been a lot of topics in this thread :) But my point way back up at the top is just this: If being gay is defined by who you're attracted to, and "who you're attracted to" can change, then "being gay" is probably not something hardwired into you before you are born. Correlate, sure. Not something you can consciously control, sure. But I really think it's something that must be taken on a moment-by-moment basis, not a lifetime-by-lifetime basis.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]