 | | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
|
(...) You've asked them all, have you? I would say many heterosexuals would probably have such revulsion, but I wouldn't be arrogant enought to assume they ALL do. ROSCO (20 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
|
(...) Specifically, the revulsion of heterosexuals by the idea of engaging in homosexual sex. I wouldn't put that "feeling" on par with even incest, which probably is just deep taboo (whatever that is). JOHN (20 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
(...) Google for "Metrosexual". Not "swishy", but perhaps hitting some of the stereotypes (well groomed, fit and trim, with it trendwise, fashionably dressed, etc...) that people have (c.f. _Queer Eye for the Straight Guy_ which clearly (seems to, (...) (20 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
(...) Gay community, meaning G/L/B/T? (...) A personal who grows up heterosexual, and, for whatever reason, decides to forsake that and lead a gay lifestyle. I'm assuming this is possible-- that they weren't just repressing their gayness until a (...) (20 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
(...) Hmmm. Can we do that? You are implying that the two are equal and interchangable things. It seems to me that being heterosexual is the default, and then something happens (socialization, etc), and some become gay. There is a great deal of (...) (20 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
John wrote in message ... (...) That (...) Merely (...) Basically, yes. But some people distinguish between homosexual (attracted to the same sex) and gay (attracted to the same sex and itentifying themselves as part of the gay community). (...) Not (...) (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
(...) We can't be sure, but the fact that non-human animals have demonstrated homosexual preferences suggests that it could very well be genetic for many people. For others it could be psychological (horribly traumatized by one or more members of (...) (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
|
(...) Logic dictates that he cannot think that LGBT tendancies are genetically influenced, since simultaneously claiming them to be sinful would be as socially regressive as saying that it's sinful to be born with a birthspot. He can't have it both (...) (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
(...) John asked a simple question which I think is a common misconception. It can be summed up with a few definitions which should help clarify (and these definitions are scholarly, you can disagree with them if you wish - I'm just putting out (...) (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
(...) Let's turn the tables on that question. What makes someone hetero? Merely the fact that they are attracted to the opposite sex? If the answer is no to the above questions does that mean that virgins are neither homosexual or heterosexual but (...) (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
(...) What definition are you talking about?? I was simply asking a question and he posts, puts words into my mouth and then calls it *sick*. Needless to say I didn't appreciate his tangental interruption into an area I had had a genuine interest to (...) (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
(...) I strongly considered correcting Terry, but noted that he wasn't calling you sick, rather your definition sick. Nevertheless, his tone does concern me and other LUGNET admins and we're keeping a close eye on his posts too [1]. Terry -- please (...) (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
(...) Ahh, pejorative remarks like being called "*sick*"? Gotcha. JOHN (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
(...) No thats an effect, not a cause. (...) I would tend to think they're more likely to consider themselves bi, or a repressed gay that's been trying out hetero for a while (for whatever reason). ROSCO (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
(...) "What does made someone gay?". Deer, deer, the buck stops here. (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
(...) John, please tone down your comments a bit. It's OK to clarify what your intent was, its not OK to hurl a pejorative remark like that. Thanks. -Tim (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
(...) No, you moron, I'm simply asking a question. JOHN (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New poll: sexuality and Lugnet
|
|
(...) How about teens who are not sexually active yet? Or maybe people who simply never had a lover yet. Maybe even those religious zealot who "preserve" themselves for the "right" person? What you're saying, John, is that you were NOT hetero until (...) (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Driver humiliated by Texas judge
|
|
(...) You could always behead them, then if they haven't re-offended in 6 months, re-attach their head. Or maybe the offenders could be strapped to the fronts of modified dune-buggies like in the movie 'Mad Max 2'. pete.w (who drives in the slow (...) (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Driver humiliated by Texas judge
|
|
(...) I don't think a permanent punishment is in order at all. I'd say 6 months or so would be more than adequate to 1) make sure the offender never, ever drives recklessly again, and 2) all he comes into contact with on the road think very (...) (20 years ago, 19-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
