Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 11
ali smack

why is homophobia commonplace?

421 posts in this topic

Homosexuality is not 'natural' as it is a genetic dead end.

We don't know that. It is found in all sorts of species and somehow it persists in the gene pool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't know that. It is found in all sorts of species and somehow it persists in the gene pool.

Homosexuality is not found in all sorts of species. When dogs, wolves, baboons, etc, mount one another it is to establish dominance, there is no penetration, erection ejaculation involved. Your statement is a false one repeated many times, and no more true now than it ever was.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Use that reference while writing a paper on the subject and be shot down hard. Anybody can post anything they want on wikipedia. Among animals other than humans it is not sex, it is a show of dominance. Dolphins do not take turns being on top if you get my drift. There is one dominant and one submissive, typical in a pack, pod or flock of any animals.

As I understand sex, it involves erect phaluses, penetration, and ejaculation, none of which happens during animals displays of same sex humping. Animals do not have sex for enjoyment or recreation they have it for reproduction, an impossibility between same sex species. It is poor science to read human motivations and sentiments into animal behaviour.

edit to add I've observed many many times two of my male dogs while I was a kid exhibiting this behaviour. No sex ever took place, and it was always the larger dominant dog on top, so how is that homosexual? It was a dominance display. nothing more.

Edited by OverSword
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this is going to seem incredible to you.

But there are religious people who see it as against Gods law.

Then your god is a bigot, and is not worth worshiping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I have a question. Based on my post above about same sex dominance display by animals, should I be labled a homophobe?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Use that reference while writing a paper on the subject and be shot down hard. Anybody can post anything they want on wikipedia. Among animals other than humans it is not sex, it is a show of dominance. Dolphins do not take turns being on top if you get my drift. There is one dominant and one submissive, typical in a pack, pod or flock of any animals.

As I understand sex, it involves erect phaluses, penetration, and ejaculation, none of which happens during animals displays of same sex humping. Animals do not have sex for enjoyment or recreation they have it for reproduction, an impossibility between same sex species. It is poor science to read human motivations and sentiments into animal behaviour.

edit to add I've observed many many times two of my male dogs while I was a kid exhibiting this behaviour. No sex ever took place, and it was always the larger dominant dog on top, so how is that homosexual? It was a dominance display. nothing more.

How about this one.

http://www.livescience.com/2534-sex-couples-common-wild.html

or

http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/20718.aspx

Got news for you, humans are an animal. We are a species of hominid, which is a type of ape.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

How about this one.

http://www.livescien...ommon-wild.html

or

http://www.news-medi...0/23/20718.aspx

Got news for you, humans are an animal. We are a species of hominid, which is a type of ape.

As soon as I see actual animal sex involving two males, with all that sex entails ie; penetration, erections, ejaculation, I'll believe it. As I stated I've seen same sex humping to establish dominance among animals many many times. It's not really sex and does not indicate a preference by the animal towards homosexuality. As I said its poor science to read human motivations into animal behaviour and I absolutely don't buy the quacks that say otherwise.

And yes I'm aware we are a type of ape.

edit to add there is no reason anyone should be offended by these statements, I also don't believe that animals have the same motivation for intercourse that I do 99% of the time that I'm trying to get some from a female.

Edited by OverSword
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As soon as I see actual animal sex involving two males, with all that sex entails ie; penetration, erections, ejaculation, I'll believe it. As I stated I've seen same sex humping to establish dominance among animals many many times. It's not really sex and does not indicate a preference by the animal towards homosexuality. As I said its poor science to read human motivations into animal behaviour and I absolutely don't buy the quacks that say otherwise.

And yes I'm aware we are a type of ape.

edit to add there is no reason anyone should be offended by these statements, I also don't believe that animals have the same motivation for intercourse that I do 99% of the time that I'm trying to get some from a female.

Humans are one of the very few species who have sex for pleasure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fun fact: anyone who throws around the term "bigot" to discredit a person or idea is simply incapable of providing a cognizant argument.

With that out of the way, I'll address the subject at hand.

Homosexuality itself is obviously natural (the evidence seems to suggest it is caused by particular conditions in the prenatal environment). But homosexuality is different than homoeroticism. The former is an orientation while the latter is simply engaging in sexual acts with a member of the same sex. It's important to distinguish between these two, both in discussing animal behavior and human behavior and ideas in the past.

Most instances of animal "homosexuality" are merely homoeroticism. Perhaps some are dominance displays, but others are likely to be the result of needing a hole and not having a member of the opposite sex around. That's not to say animal homosexuality is impossible, but it is very difficult to observe in the wild (but it has been observed in laboratory conditions.

In humans, when we look at antiquity, what we find is mostly homoeroticism. Biblical passages, for example, forbid homoerotic acts, but say nothing specifically about a homosexual orientation. In Classcial Antiquity (i.e. Ancient Greece and Rome), we often find mentions of homoerotic acts, but these are in the context of a system that defines sexuality differently. Their system looked at sexual roles--the male plays the active role, the female plays the passive role. So if a man chooses to anally penetrate another man, the first man is in the masculine role--it is the receiver who is in the feminine or homosexual role. And indeed it was considered a great dishonor to be in the passive role, such that it was actually illegal for one man to anally penetrate another citizen--it was only allowed for slaves. In Ancient Athens in particular we find such laws, and moreover we find that there are known homosexuals who actually routinely engage in the passive role by choice. These men were understandably ridiculed. In fact one such man, named Cleisthenes, was repeatedly ridiculed in the plays of Aristophanes.

So we can see from ancient writings that homosexuality, and sometimes homoeroticism, was not viewed favorably. That is, this is clearly a natural state. One need not credit religion for denigration of homosexuality; rather religion merely codified the extant societal disapproval of it.

Now if we look at the modern context, we can establish some simple ideas. Firstly, it is perfectly normal to find homosexuality distasteful or unappealing. Secondly, modern society has taken homosexuality to an extreme never before seen--public celebration of this abnormality. So we understandably see a rise in so-called "homophobia" because we are being assaulted with it in parades and in the media. In the past homosexuals were generally normal people who either tried to live a normal life or kept their sexual preferences a private matter. Modern homosexuals, on the other hand, frequently define themselves first and foremost by their homosexuality (whereas straight folk usually prioritize other definitions, such as occupations, familial roles, ethnic heritage, etc.). That is, this modern phenomenon of widespread "homophobia" is due to the nonsensical elevation of a mental disorder to a source of pride. Few pedophiles, schizophrenics, manic-depressives, etc. take their disorders as a source of pride, and that is normal. Homosexuals desperately need to re-evaluate their self-conceptions and roles in society.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is homophobia so commonplace?

Why in our society is homosexuality hated and frowned upon. The same with Bisexuality regarding men.

But lesbianism and Bisexuality regarding women is thought as fine.

Anyone know why this is the case?

In a word: sodomy. This is what offends and disgusts people.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bigotry is bigotry, no mater how you try and spin it. Being anti-gay is the same as being anti-black or anti-jew, etc.

That's a nice PC slogan, but it doesn't address my point. Some people reject the lifestyle because it's not compatible with their belief system, and that doesn't make them bigots (in the real world). That's not spin; that's just truth. It could be that attacking and insulting these religious individuals is its own form of bigotry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then your god is a bigot, and is not worth worshiping.

What do you mean 'your God'?

You make it sound like I'm the minority when you are.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nature is all about survival, be it killing animals for food, or having sex with the opposite sex to pro-create; for humans anyway..

Is that wrong in ANY way? Seem's a natural dictate from Nature.

Or should all humans die in the next 2 hundred years from being only homosexual?

Thats a misnomer. That's like saying if everyone was infertile humanity would die out and using that as an excuse to demonise infertile people. The fact is gay poeople, like infertile people make up a small portion of humanity and no one is saying or advocating that everyone should be gay.

But klets for example, say what you say did happen, that the entire population suddenly became gay. ould it mean the end of the species like you claim? Well if it happened 100+ years ago then yes it would because hetrosexual sex was the only means of producing children. However, now we have artifical insemination. This is a form of procreation that gay people are more than willing to do. So it's safe to assume that a 100% population of homosexuals would use the same (or more advanced techniques) to ensure the species survival. Of course the advantage of this would be that every child is wanted and planned for.

So no, a 100% population of gay people wouldn't mean the end of the species (unless it was only one gender or everyone was infertile too).

I know this is going to seem incredible to you.

But there are religious people who see it as against Gods law.

And there are religious people that don't.

There's religious people that think anyone that converts from their religion should be killed. Should their views be given weight because of their god's law?

God's law really shouldn't enter into it.

Now I have a question. Based on my post above about same sex dominance display by animals, should I be labled a homophobe?

No, unless you were trying to use that to invalidate same sex relationships based on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

That's a nice PC slogan, but it doesn't address my point. Some people reject the lifestyle because it's not compatible with their belief system, and that doesn't make them bigots (in the real world). That's not spin; that's just truth. It could be that attacking and insulting these religious individuals is its own form of bigotry.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, what lifestyle? There's no such thing as a gay lifestyle, anymore than there is a straight lifestyle.

I think we have to combat such belief systems that claim that it's incompatible and not just shrug and go 'ok then'. If a belief system said that advocated women or people of a certain skin colour were incompatible with the faith's teachings woould you be ok with that or would you want that belief to be challenged?

To be honest, I'm sick of people who use their religion as a shield to hide behind so they can treat others negatively.

Edited by shadowhive
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's because homophobics are afraid they might be gay themselves. Like that one church group that protest everything and blames everything on gay people, they're the gayest people around probably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Homophobia is taught. It is not natural. There are no homophobic animals...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yes, and it is largely cultural. There are parts of the world where absent Western missionaries the idea never occurred to anyone.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Homophobia is taught. It is not natural. There are no homophobic animals...

No it isnt.

As a young child my instincts automatically told me those people arent normal. Thats without anybody trying to indocturnate me to a particular way of thinking. I say my disapproval of homosexuality was inherited.

Edited by Mr Right Wing
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I had a roomate from Laos many years ago and he was a little disturbed by the gay people where I live (I live in the gayest nieghborhood in the 3rd gayest city in America) and when I mentioned something about gay people in Laos he looked at me in all seriousness and said "Jon, there's no gays in Laos, we would kill them" To which I laughed.

Edited by OverSword
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really buy that unless he was already infected by your bias. Laotians aren't like that at all, and there are plenty of very effeminate men visible in the streets unmolested -- in fact pretty much unnoticed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really buy that unless he was already infected by your bias. Laotians aren't like that at all, and there are plenty of very effeminate men visible in the streets unmolested -- in fact pretty much unnoticed.

Many homosexuals think homosexuality is wrong.

But for them its too late to stop as they've already tasted the fobidden fruit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The label 'homophobia' is applied to anyone who disagrees with what homosexuals are doing.

Homosexuality is no longer listed as a mental illness. When we search psychology to find out why we dont discover that psychologists found evidence showing it wasnt mental illness. What is revealed is it was taken off the list simply because human rights groops were demanding more freedoms for them.

Therefore I'm against homosexuality because I see it as a symptom of mental illness and specifically a sociopathic disorder. As a young child a combination of abusive parents, poor diet and genetics triggers a sociopathic disorder. The disorder stops certain areas of the brain developing properly including those that control sexuality.

I'm also against it on religious grounds however after reading the bible I think there are misconceptions promoted by the Church. The only unforgivable sin according to the Holy book is blasphemy. Homosexuality can be forgiven and theres passages in Matthew where homosexuals have been forgiven.

I'm also not a liberal I'm conservative.

Your own personal opinion/what you have been taught/or come up with yourself. is not based in facts, (of course you are entitled to it), but here are the facts for your consideration.

In a review of published studies comparing homosexual and heterosexual samples on psychological tests, Gonsiorek (1982) found that, although some differences have been observed in test results between homosexuals and heterosexuals, both groups consistently score within the normal range. Gonsiorek concluded that "Homosexuality in and of itself is unrelated to psychological disturbance or maladjustment. Homosexuals as a group are not more psychologically disturbed on account of their homosexuality" (Gonsiorek, 1982, p. 74; see also reviews by Gonsiorek, 1991; Hart, Roback, Tittler, Weitz, Walston & McKee, 1978; Riess, 1980).

Confronted with overwhelming empirical evidence and changing cultural views of homosexuality, psychiatrists and psychologists radically altered their views, beginning in the 1970s.

In 1973, the weight of empirical data, coupled with changing social norms and the development of a politically active gay community in the United States, led the Board of Directors of the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).

http://psychology.uc...tal_health.html

Edited by Sherapy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it isnt.

As a young child my instincts automatically told me those people arent normal. Thats without anybody trying to indocturnate me to a particular way of thinking. I say my disapproval of homosexuality was inherited.

The instcts of a young child are hardly the best thing to go on. I've seen young childen try to eat poisonous berries because their instincts said they'd be good. There are many other such examples, but just because the instinct of a child thought x was good or bad doesn't validate it one bit.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Many homosexuals think homosexuality is wrong.

But for them its too late to stop as they've already tasted the fobidden fruit.

The ones that think its wrong' largely do so because of religious indoctrination, which is hardly heathy and is largely due to fear.

Edited by shadowhive
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 11

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.