Subject:
|
Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 4 Dec 2001 19:19:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
213 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Robert M. Dye writes:
> > It is the FACT that heteros
> > find the opposite sex attractive that MAKES us heteros, not some "choice" to
> > find the opposite sex attractive by people who are "already" hetero.
>
> I don't think it's a question of circular definition-- it's a question of
> "why". Why am I attracted to women and not men? Why are heterosexuals
> attracted to the opposite sex? Not, "why am I a heterosexual?". IE, if
> gayness is a choice, is heterosexuality similarly a choice? Or is
> heterosexuality "genetic" and gayness not? Or are both genetic? Etc.
What muddies the issue here is that you have gays who are so at birth (IMO), and
then you have the *lifestyle choice* gays, who, for one reason or another,
choose to experiment with their sexuality with the same sex (so-called
bisexuals). I don't think anyone would argue that one can be *bisexual* from
birth, so that would imply *choices*.
-John
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
| (...) I don't think it's a question of circular definition-- it's a question of "why". Why am I attracted to women and not men? Why are heterosexuals attracted to the opposite sex? Not, "why am I a heterosexual?". IE, if gayness is a choice, is (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
97 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
