Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Please - Some Impartial Advice Needed
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7799
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 45 of 240 (405111)
06-11-2007 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by taylor_31
06-08-2007 3:00 PM


I probably would be making a big mistake to come out and then be wrong about it! Is it possible to learn to like girls? Or am I stupid for even thinking such a dumb thought?
You aren't stupid for thinking or trying it. I am fortunate in that my friends are highly sexually diverse so when I 'came out' with regards to my bisexuality I received no hostility - quite the contrary, I got a lot of support. I have not discussed it with my parents, for reasons I will reveal.
First though, about the learning to like girls thing, when I came out I was quite young (16 I think), and I thought that I should try and like men in equal quantity as I do women. I felt bad that this wasn't the case and really really tried to do it.
After several years I came to the following conclusion: I find attractive whoever I find attractive. I don't worry if that is a male person or a female person, if I find them attractive I don't repress that feeling - I experience it.
I identify as bisexual if asked because I feel I find men attractive more often than people that identify themselves as straight. However, in anonymous surveys men who identify themselves as straight routinely admit that they have homosexual fantasies from time to time.
As to why I have never told my parents about it? Because I feel as nonchalant about it as described above, I just find attractive people attractive regardless of gender. There is no need to tell my folks this, my sexuality is my own affair. My parents certainly never told me their sexuality nor have they enquired into my own. It is a different story if you are planning on getting a boyfriend of course - it is only polite to warn your parents before bringing him over but I live away from home now, so I never needed worry about that.
As indicated, I am fortunate that I have no frame of reference to really understand your position. I have some family in Louisiana and I can somewhat appreciate the extent of the cultural aversity towards homosexuality there. As such I can give you no good advice as to what to do with regards to your friends and family. All I can offer you, is the nugget of wisdom I only gleamed after years of searching: Find attractive whomever you find attractive.
I truly hope your social/familial problems are resolved satisfactorily.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by taylor_31, posted 06-08-2007 3:00 PM taylor_31 has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7799
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 101 of 240 (405746)
06-14-2007 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Rahvin
06-14-2007 1:57 AM


an asside on the character of the US
Actually...the US, being the nation with the highest Christian population in the world
Certainly not by percentages...at least not when it comes to self identification. I think its about 70-80% Christian in the US and Spain is over 90%.
...also has the highest per capita violence (including rape and murder)
Is very very wrong. Thailand (Buddhist) beats the USA on murder as does Russia (non religious), the US is in the mid 20s (1998 - 2000). Canada and Australia beat the US in rape. Spain leads the way in robberies. (Source: Seventh United Nations Survey of Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems, covering the period 1998 - 2000 (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Centre for International Crime Prevention).
the highest per capita infant mortality rates
Ethiopa: 92 per 1,000 live births.
USA: 6 per 1,000 live births.
(CIA World Factbook).
the highest number of abortions
I believe Russia has double the number of abortions. source.
Some of the LEAST religious nations on Earth (mostly the Scandinavian nations, as I recall) have the LOWEST levels of violence
Finland (about 85% Christian) and Iceland (over 90% Christian) are 11th and 12th highest for assault. Norway (over 90% Christian) is 17th. These statistics are half a decade old - and are debatable, but the big atheist countries places like China, Vietnam and Russia. So while I get your point regarding crime and Christianity the least religious countries don't compare overly favourably from what I can see.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Rahvin, posted 06-14-2007 1:57 AM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by Neutralmind, posted 06-14-2007 6:26 PM Modulous has replied
 Message 105 by Rahvin, posted 06-14-2007 7:07 PM Modulous has not replied
 Message 107 by bluegenes, posted 06-14-2007 7:59 PM Modulous has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7799
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 111 of 240 (405826)
06-15-2007 2:18 AM
Reply to: Message 103 by Neutralmind
06-14-2007 6:26 PM


Re: an aside on the character of the US
As I said - the stats are debatable, but I provided my source (CIA factbook). If they are predominantly atheist despite the self-identification as belonging to the Church of X, that doesn't help the case that they are low on violent crime. The point being that the statement made was fallacious in some fashion.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Neutralmind, posted 06-14-2007 6:26 PM Neutralmind has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7799
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 130 of 240 (405886)
06-15-2007 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by Hyroglyphx
06-15-2007 11:24 AM


Re: The mysteries of life
If it seems to have some sort of purpose or order to it, the commonly held belief among evolutionists is that through trial and error, nature will find the most efficient way of doing things.
Actually, evolutionists argue quite different. Not the most efficient way, often an inefficient way. Nature finds evolutionarily stable strategies - if increasing efficiency means temporarily decreasing fitness then it is likely to not happen unless the fitness landscape changes and then maybe it can.
What you have just described is the most inefficient, unnatural way of doing things.
Welcome to evolution. It produces inefficiency since it only needs to produce organisms that just get by. Hence our eye layout is inefficient, as is our circulatory system. And nature is abound with things as 'unnatural' as homosexuals who occasionally have reproductive sex.
If homosexuality was selected by nature, then for what? What advantageous quality would it be to give a creature the desire to copulate with members of its own sex, but still allow for it to go against its own nature to produce offspring?
See Homosexuality and Natural Selection..
One theory is that male homosexuality is a side effect of increased female sibling fecundity. That is to say, if a mother or father has a certain genetic makeup, they might be inclined towards having gay boys or highly reproductive girls. This could well balance out, but gay males can also help in rearing their nephews/cousins etc which would also be selected for.
There are many strategies out there, and this homosexual/fecundity connection might be one of them. This strategy can be built upon. A slightly better strategy might be to increase the reproductive drive of the gay males so that they are more inclined to have children to counterbalance there lack of desire for females. I don't know whether this has been looked into: perhaps normal human desire to have children is already strong enough for enough homosexual men for it to suffice (not the most efficient way, but that's evolution for you - sometimes getting more efficient comes at an unbearable cost).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-15-2007 11:24 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by jar, posted 06-15-2007 12:41 PM Modulous has not replied
 Message 136 by molbiogirl, posted 06-15-2007 12:46 PM Modulous has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7799
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 194 of 240 (406344)
06-19-2007 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by Phat
06-19-2007 11:43 AM


Re: The mysteries of life
Have you ever considered that you are doing irreparable mental harm to these same young people by telling them that anything that feels good can and should be experienced?
I've certainly considered that. I decided against teaching that lesson, since it would include being for taking heroin, continuing to take heroin and never stopping. It would be encouraging unprotected promiscuity, an obvious health hazard.
Actually - one of the lessons I think it is imperative we get across to young people is that one should balance any negative health consequences against the pleasure of the experience before coming to an informed decision about how to handle the situation.
Another lesson is in the golden rule and practical morality decisions. The bottom line being that if you want to engage in an activity (after making the informed decision to do so), you should then consider others who will be affected by the action. If all parties involved consent to the action after making their own informed consent, then go for it.
Nobody is saying - if it feels good - do it. Teaching kids hedonism as a lifestyle is irresponsible from our cultural perspective. If they choose to be hedonists after making an informed decision - then that is fine as long as they do not harm others.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Phat, posted 06-19-2007 11:43 AM Phat has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024