Why be gay?

This blog explains my views of homosexuality based strictly on a scientific and psychological perspective.

Saturday, December 23, 2006

The psychological problem of Homosexuality

Homosexuality is actually a simple psychological problem prevalent in many societies. However the recognition of Homosexuality as a serious psychological problem that requires counselling and therapy is often strongly impeded by its very own denial as a serious psychological problem.

The reason for denying Homosexuality as a psychological problem lies with individuals who cannot accept their own mistakes and adopt self-preservation measures to shift responsibility.

The causes for a person to take on homosexuality are varied and diverse, as different people are affected differently by different nature and nurture aspects of life.

Some common causes of homosexuality are due to factors in family upbringing such as deficient parental or poor fatherly skills. Many homosexuals are brought up with deficient adult male identities caused by lack of interactions with good male adults. The lack of positive male adult role-modelling would later cause them to be seen as effeminate males when they grow up.

Many homosexuals are also confused by the meaning of homosexuality, believing in hearsays that promote homosexuality as a way to express love for another similar gender person. However the inclusion of sexual practises in homosexuality would deem the propagation of its many love-sharing values to be a false claim and a great lie.

Many homosexuals believe that physical intimacy is a showing of love for another same-gender person. However at this point, intuitive and reasonable people would question the true notions of love. What does the word love really mean? Is love simply an expression of one's liking for another person? Homosexuals have yet to provide a legitible explanation for their perception of love, this which would deem their definition of Homosexuality as a way of showing love to be unsubstantiated and even a well made-believed fantasy and fallacy.

The many fantasies that predominate Homosexuality as a blissful way of life clearly demonstrate homosexuals' escapism and denial mentality for the unpleasants and imperfections of life. The need of these mentalities are led by problems and difficulties in their lives that traps and suppresses their need for self-expression and re-connecting with other people. The need for one to be heard and re-connection would later be resolved by a person adopting Homosexuality as a way for self-expression. The repressed need for self-expression could later be observed as exaggerated behaviour demonstrated by homosexuals.

Another group of homosexuals that do not have such exaggerated behaviour are often mistaken as heterosexual-behaving. Such homosexuals do not have a great need for self-expression but see same-gender sexual practises as an effective way to re-connect with other males, to re-connect with the desirable male identities. Such a strong distraction while being attracted to other desirable males would prove to be an effective distraction for their segregation from these same-gender people who exhibit such desirable male identities. It is plain desire manifesting in different forms.

Many homosexuals' great escapism while going after males who exhibit their desired male characteristics would often block out important factors to be considered. Many promiscuous homosexuals often misplace important judgement such as taking sexual precautions. This could lead to the epidemic of sexual diseases that could claim lives. It is a sorry state of self-sacrifice by giving up one's body and life to seek another. This is one of many examples of Homosexuality exhibiting serious failure in mental judgement which would deem it as a serious psychological problem that would require therapy.

The acceptance of Homosexuality as a psychological problem is further impeded by homosexuals' denial of it as a problem, and to recognise themselves as performers of the problem.

Many psychologists worldwide do not agree with the view of the American Psychological Association that Homosexuality is not a psychological problem. Homosexuals like to refer to the APA to defend their own views of Homosexuality. However the APA's argument of their diagnosis of Homosexuality is not a conclusive one to convince many psychologists from their doubts.

Many homosexuals have listed some studies done on Homosexuality to justify its practice and to claim for further human rights such as same-gender marriages and adoptions. Studies have been done in the west such as some homophobes' reactions to homosexual pornography and some homosexuals' reactions to same-gender pheromones. However such studies are not conclusive enough to prove rare anomalies as widespread occurences, and to prove Homosexuality as a positive occurence of life. But simply demonstrating the existence of rare, naturally occuring phenomenon are not sufficient to deem anomalies as widespread non-problems.

From an objective perspective of the studies done, one could also conclude the studies as the demonstration of naturally occuring problems of nature, such as the demonstration of rare but naturally occuring anomalies such as Cancer. However even the common flu is naturally occuring.

So how does one deem an occurence between natural and a physical or psychological anomaly? The main factor that differentiate between the both lies in the presence of physical or psychological painful discomforts.

Homosexuals clearly demonstrate the presence of psychological discomforts such as their past repression of self-expression, segregation due to poor communication skills and loneliness. Homosexuals would later try to resolve these discomforts and anomalies by adopting Homosexuality as a way of life. But would Homosexuality actually resolve the initial communication problems that lead to Homosexuality?

The effectiveness of Homosexuality can only be seen in the way how homosexuals are understood by others, and whether they can bring their points across to other people. But often, the lack of effective communication skills, logical thinking, self-centeredness and emotional behaviours would get in the way of effective discourse with other people.

The denial, escapism and blame-shifting mentality of homosexuals also sees them putting blame on their parents who refuse to accept their child as homosexual, that their parents are also required to "come out" and accept their child as homosexual. However, the reluctance of parents to accept parental failure and their poor or deficient communication skills with their homosexual child is a good evidence that poor parenting skills is a main factor of Homosexuality. Many parents of homosexuals are often divorced or not on good talking terms with each other. Such families clearly demonstrate the poor and deficient communication skills that could lead to homosexuals' poor communication skills.

Poor and deficient parenting skills are also factors to a person seeking Homosexuality. The lack of parenting skills that teaches a child that expressions of love is not only demonstrated from physical intimacy alone but also through many other ways to show concern and love. That the true meaning of love is to perceive a fellow person as one perceives oneself, this is the true meaning of love as from the Bible and what the spirit of Christmas is about.

People who fail to recognise what love really is and how to express it effectively to others might turn to Homosexuality as a distorted means to resolve their repressed need for self-expression, to resolve their poor communication skills in order to connect effectively with people, and to curb their segregation from people so as to resolve their immense loneliness from the lack of effective love expression.

Paedophiles who are homosexuals might be trying to obsessively reconnect to young children, through physical touch alone. They fail to utlise other forms of communication in order to express their liking for young children.

The failure to resolve the true meaning of love, its poor expression and poor communication skills would only spread and worsens. Homosexuality is not an effective way to resolve poor communication skills, expression of love and loneliness. The way to resolve Homosexuality is to firstly remove the denial of it as a real psychological problem, and to find alternative ways to resolve the initial problems of poor communication skills, expressions of love and loneliness. Only when a problem is truly recognised for what it is can people begin to resolve themselves.


P.S. I believe I have listed the main points of the simple problems of Homosexuality therefore there may not be further posts on this blog. For my intended audience of this blog, I hope they being the discerning and understanding few, would be able to discern the information in this blog, put its knowledge into practice and lead a life worth leading. I may not be dealing with the problem of Homosexuality any further as it is not a very pleasant problem to think about.

40 Comments:

At 12:43 AM, Blogger longantree said...

"Homosexuality is actually a simple psychological problem prevalent in many societies." Contrast this with the American Psychological Association's stance at http://www.apa.org/topics/orientation.html

"The lack of positive male adult role-modelling would later cause them to be seen as effeminate males when they grow up." It would? How?

"Many homosexuals are also confused by the meaning of homosexuality, believing in hearsays that promote homosexuality as a way to express love for another similar gender person." And who are you, that you are the expert voice and authority on such a topic? Might it not be that your understanding of homosexuality is the deificient and mistaken one?

"However the inclusion of sexual practises in homosexuality would deem the propagation of its many love-sharing values to be a false claim and a great lie." Heterosexuality also involves sex, so your argument would work both ways, and in doing so, leading nowhere.

"However at this point, intuitive and reasonable people would question the true notions of love." Only them? How exclusive of you.

"Homosexuals have yet to provide a legitible explanation for their perception of love, this which would deem their definition of Homosexuality as a way of showing love to be unsubstantiated and even a well made-believed fantasy and fallacy." Legitible by whose standards? As it is, among scientific circles, it is widely accepted; among psychological circles, so is it the same. Where is your evidence? Talking is all very well, but if you choose to present your points as logical arguments then do display your evidence to support your argument.

"The many fantasies that predominate Homosexuality as a blissful way of life" In the first place, being gay is not blissful, even if gay means happy as well. Being gay, one has to face discrimination, of the negative sort, from many sides. There's the religious aspect, political and legal discrimination, and plain ignorance at times, to contend with, when one is being gay. Often is the word 'gay', and its synonyms, bantered about, and used widely as a derogatory term. Is that your idea of a blissful life? How ironic.

"It is plain desire manifesting in different forms." True, which is why there exists a new label 'MSM', which stands for men who have sex with men. This includes people who identify themselves as straight, yet engage in gay sex. Still, what is wrong with that? Is desire unnatural? Only when excessive, yes. Otherwise, it happens.

"This is one of many examples of Homosexuality exhibiting serious failure in mental judgement which would deem it as a serious psychological problem that would require therapy." That many gays engage in promiscuous behaviour is no different from many straight people engaging in promiscuous behaviour. Would you like to conclude that being heterosexual is also a failure in mental judgment just because prostitution, adultery and promiscuity exists among heterosexuals?

"The acceptance of Homosexuality as a psychological problem is further impeded by homosexuals' denial of it as a problem, and to recognise themselves as performers of the problem." I would like to rephrase it this way: 'The acceptance of Homosexuality as not-a-problem is further impeded by whybegay's denial of it as not-a-problem, and to recognise that he himself is the performer of his problem. We can go around calling each other names all day, but if we are to allow a judge, and I name the American Psychological Association as mine, what would the verdict be, you suppose?

"Many homosexuals have listed some studies done on Homosexuality to justify its practice and to claim for further human rights such as same-gender marriages and adoptions." Exclusivity again. Psychologists and scientists have listed such studies because it is part of their work.

"However such studies are not conclusive enough to prove rare anomalies as widespread occurences" I found this extremely amusing. By your own words, of course what you define as rare cannot be widespread. So, what have you got to say, besides tautology?

"Homosexuals clearly demonstrate the presence of psychological discomforts such as their past repression of self-expression, segregation due to poor communication skills and loneliness." Generalisation here. And illogical too. 'Clearly demonstrate'? Show it!

"But often, the lack of effective communication skills, logical thinking" Do I lack logical thinking?

"However, the reluctance of parents to accept parental failure and their poor or deficient communication skills with their homosexual child is a good evidence that poor parenting skills is a main factor of Homosexuality." It is probably more because of people like you that there exists such homophobia, than parental failure.

"People who fail to recognise what love really is and how to express it effectively to others might turn to Homosexuality" As long as you use a non-conclusive word like 'might' I won't argue against that, because there does exist a chance of anything happening. But once you categorically state that homosexuality IS a problem and so on, then will my rebuttals come.

"Homosexuality is not an effective way to resolve poor communication skills, expression of love and loneliness." Its not a way of solving problems at all; its a way of life.

"The way to resolve Homosexuality is to firstly remove the denial of it as a real psychological problem" or to remove the denial that homophobes have.

"For my intended audience of this blog, I hope they being the discerning and understanding few, would be able to discern the information in this blog, put its knowledge into practice and lead a life worth leading." My impression is that you are one of those people who claim that you were once gay but now turned sraight, and am now attempting to convince people. I pity you.

Usually, I only point out the flaws in the opening statements for any given paragraph, because that forms the basis for whatever elaboration you give. Only in the case of the opening statement being true would anything else follow; as such, I don't bother criticising every single sentence of yours because whatever argument you put forth would be demolished once the basis of it is gone.

Still, despite the ignorance and poor logic you display, I must thank you for providing this opportnity for having this discourse, even if I'd rather there be no need for such in the first place.

 
At 5:15 PM, Blogger whybegay said...

APA? Apa ini?

 
At 6:50 AM, Blogger longantree said...

If you had read the first paragraph of my rebuttal thoroughly enough, you should have been able to make the connection between "American Psychological Association" and the link "...www.APA.org...", with "apa" capitalised just in case you still miss it.

 
At 11:36 AM, Blogger whybegay said...

If you had read my blog thoroughly enough, you should have realised that I have already mentioned the APA in my April 4th post and that I do not agree with them along with many psychologists.

 
At 8:24 PM, Blogger longantree said...

Your agreement, or lack thereof, makes no difference. They are the authority; their stand still stands. In which case, since your view is counter to theirs, you are wrong, in psychological circles.

And if you've already mentioned APA, why ask "APA? apa ini?"

 
At 6:49 AM, Blogger whybegay said...

Sorry, they are not the authority. They are an association not a worldwide organisation. Do you know what "association" and "organisation" mean? The US gov doesn't endorse their views, nor does the SG gov. Their view doesn't cover the world. If a view can be accepted by the APA so can it be taken down.

Answer to your last question: Because similar to what Rene Descartes once said, although the APA *think* they are, but sometimes I don't *think* they exist.

 
At 2:07 AM, Blogger longantree said...

True, true, that neither the US nor SG gov endorse APA's stand... but then, that isn't the concern anyway. More pertinent would be that APA is the leading association of psychologists, who are as such by far much more qualified than any government regarding this issue. Fallacies abound...

 
At 11:31 PM, Blogger whybegay said...

Are you really sure they are the "leading" association of psychologists, and are more qualified than any government regarding this issue?

 
At 8:52 AM, Blogger longantree said...

Homosexuality is often touted as a psychological problem, especially by you. In which case, an association of psychologists would know better than a government because it is the association's responsibility, duty and business to know. The government may have its own duty to know, true, but then, does it also have the same qualifications?

 
At 7:26 PM, Blogger whybegay said...

That's for you to find out about the US government's psychologists before making wild assumptions about matters half way across the world on alien territory. The burden of proof is on you.

 
At 6:18 AM, Blogger longantree said...

Wild assumptions? Burden of proof on me? I ask you questions; you throw them back at me... its your argument that I question, and before questioning my questions, do try to answer them first.

 
At 7:16 PM, Blogger Matthew said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 3:44 AM, Blogger ItsMy said...

@longantree

Your faith in the relevance of the APA's standpoint is based on your desire to justify homosexuality as a normal, healthy condition. In agreement with @whybegay, the burden of proof IS on you, because you've made finite statements, without room for error, and without any evidence or support. For example, please specifically define "leading psychologist". Do you even know the names and accomplishments of each and every psychologist within the APA, and how their accomplishments and personal biases (are they socially conservative or liberal, for example) compare to 'non-leading psychologists'? (Wait, I'll answer my own questions: NO and NO!) Also, new disorders are being identified every day, as new discoveries constantly arise. (In other words, just because the APA hasn't deemed homosexuality as a disorder YET, doesn't mean that it won't.) Indeed, @whybegay is right: the APA does NOT speak to the world's standards - only the standards of one single association within the United States.

In America, the social standard is that being gay isn't just about sexual preference or love. Here, homosexuality is also credited as the basis of a fun, stylish, unique, rich, liberating culture. It's often glamorized in the media, and is presented as something that isn't a choice, and isn't changeable. Viewing homosexuality as a psychological problem is never even brought to the attention of most Americans, and even if it was, the biased, liberal media would squash the possibility like a bug. But, squashed or not, in reality, it IS a possibility. Actually, it's a pretty good bet!!!...

The Bible obviously says "no" to homosexuality - but I'm an Atheist, so that's pretty meaningless to me. However, what gays and their supporters fail to recognize is that science doesn't support them either. Homosexuals have sexual desires, attractions, etc, etc., which DIRECTLY CONFLICT with their PHYSICAL ANATOMY. From an evolutionary standpoint, gays ARE DEFECTIVE: In evolution, the individuals who survive and produce the most, and healthiest offspring, are the ones that continue the species - and are the ones whose DNA survives (is passed on) through future generations. In science, without the help of fertility treatments and technology, homosexuality should/would quickly eliminate a person from the gene pool (no homosexual reproduction). Homosexuality is an evolutionary DISADVANTAGE, and should therefore be weeded out (die off) - Why? Because gays can't have babies naturally, unless they have heterosexual sex. On that basis, it's actually a mystery how gays exist in the first place if being gay is in fact GENETIC. In my opinion, there goes the 'gay gene' theory. And logically, it is THAT that suggests that the problem has a PSYCHOLOGICAL basis.

 
At 10:28 PM, Blogger Matthew said...

just to clarify everyone technically has the "gay gene" if it is in fact genetics, just like everyone has a heterosexual gene. also, gay people don't harm society in any way, if anything they are doing the world a favor, more children on and already poverty filled world? i think adopting should be a more common way of having children. the earth can't support much more people, especially the way we abuse the resources we have. and just another thing, why are you so againt being gay? does it really affect you that much personally? do gay people really disturb you to the point of calling them a defect in evolution? think about what your saying, but actually. its quite sad because your wasting your short life time by telling other people how to live there lives, when really..yours is probably the one that needs the most physcological help. i mean, how happy can you truely be if you are wasting your precious time on useless articles such as this...isn't there enough hate already today? and another thing, gay people are way more open minded, which makes us see the bigger picture, there for we are beneficial to the society in many ways. i bet the clothes on your back were probably designed by one of us, and trust me if you had a wife, i bet her best friend takes it up the ass. anyways just my 2 cents.

 
At 2:22 PM, Blogger My online record... said...

Homosexuality is seen as a pshycological problem, however when you look at it the reason why anyone does or feels anything is pshycological and so if one doesnt deem it as wrong what is the problem, the reason for being homosexual may be pshycological but i personaly do not see a problem inles the 'homosexual' indivual see's on in thereself.

 
At 12:40 AM, Blogger fionnlagh said...

I completely agree with the original blogger.

First: For those non-Christian liberals out there who follow the theory of evolution. The primary hypotheses of the theory of evolution are natural selection and survival of the fittest.
Let us examine the fundamental purpose of sexuality. The purpose of the human genitalia is for the act of procreation. Biology itself refers to these organs as reproductive organs. If one engages in an act that is not for the purpose of reproduction, the behavior is outside of what is natural or normal. Moreover, since homosexuals cannot reproduce, at some point in the future homosexuality will be bred out of the human DNA. Even the adopted children of these homosexuals, if they themselves become homosexuals by proxy, that is, because they are taught that this behavior is normal and natural. They too will be excluded from humanity's future.

The burden of proof is on the homosexual to provide an adequate and scientific explanation as to the validity and purpose of this perverse activity.

There is no "gay gene" as our DNA is programmed to reproduce and not to seek same sex partners. Homosexuality is a neurological and psychological abnormality and deviation from the intended purpose of sexuality.

The proponents of homosexuality attack Christianity and conservative people. These Christians and conservatives are vigilant to protect the sanctity of the family: husband, wife, and children.

The acceptance of homosexuality into the modern society is simply and only a cultural one. This predisposition and acceptance is brought on by the special interest groups who represent less than 1% of human populations. In humanity's 10,000 years, it has only been in the last 50 years that homosexuality has been given mainstream acceptance. There is absolutely no biological purpose or reason for this behavior except for a psychological and/or a neurological one.

As the APA is an organization which is within the society, the waves of social influential pressures to accept certain ideas as normal when clearly before this acceptance the opposite was true. This is indicative of manipulation of the scientific community by these groups.

I challenge all of those homosexual proponents to show a psychological and/or neurological study conducted in an absolute social vacuum, devoid of any external influence.

Show a biological purpose of this behavior other than the lusts of the psychologically afflicted.

The original blogger spoke of an expression of love as the motivation for this behavior. Since love is a deeper and more complex phenomenon than simply a physical function or action can express. Moreover, since human biology is naturally programmed for reproduction, true love would also follow these parameters. Homosexuals are expressing lustful and subversive behavior. This emotion is similar but not completely like the relations between dating heterosexual partners who are sexually promiscuous or more similarly, the behavior between a prostitute and their customers. It is simply to fulfill some other void and has nothing to do with love, reproduction, copulation, or procreation, which again is the purpose for the reproductive organs and the act of sexual intercourse.

To even say homosexuality or homosexual intercourse is by its definition an oxymoron. It logically does not follow.

Again, homo-proponents; the burden of proof rests upon your gender-confused shoulders. You must provide a biologically sound reason for these acts.

I can think of one. It could be natures way of ridding the populous of the genetically inferior.

 
At 12:50 AM, Blogger fionnlagh said...

One additional note...

Homosexuality does damage society. Its very existence undermines the sanctity and the security of marriage. Much the same way that divorce has ravaged society. Both homosexuality and divorce are socially and biologically outside of the normal parameters of the human programming.

 
At 12:14 AM, Blogger scuzball said...

I don't think the argument rests upon whether or not being homosexual is a genetic thing. What's relevant is this: Homosexual people are attracted to members of the same sex. A man is either aroused or he isn't when he sees something naked, and homosexual men are aroused at naked men. Even though it is psychological, it has still molded minds to have a homosexual attraction. Just because it is psychological does not mean that it can necessarily be changed. After all, my acquisition of English as my first language cannot be changed. No reasonable amount of counseling will lead to a man getting aroused by a woman when if for all of his life he has been aroused only by men.

 
At 12:40 AM, Blogger happylife3 said...

So please tell us, as a "good christian" have you ever eaten pork, shellfish? Do you have a tattoo or piercing? Does your mother/wife wear jewelry? Do you go to church on every sabbath? Do you own slaves? Maybe use virgin from a warring town as sex slaves? Do you murder gentiles and witches? Does your mother/wife hide away during their menstrual cycle? Have you ever touched or been touched by a woman on her cycle? Have you ever touched something she has touched while menstruating?

If you read the bible, god lays down his law for all these things (most are in the same chapter, leviticus, as the verse condemning homosexuality). If you follow one of them you must follow all of them.

If you read the bible even more you'd find that all the laws of judaism were nix'd to allow gentiles to convert to christianity. Therefore, every law/rule laid down by god before the coming of Jesus is void.

A good argument/paper usually has cited sources to back it up (I'm interested in hearing who these many psychologists opposing the APA are). My source is your holy book, where are yours?

 
At 1:42 PM, Blogger The Celtic Chimp said...

This piece is nothing more than a collection of prejudicial wish-thinking and long debunked steryotype.

The author is very, very likely to be a moron bigot. Anyone else would not have produced such dire shite and labelled it scientific.

I wouldn't wipe my ass with this garbage

 
At 9:08 PM, Blogger commonsenseisnowabnormal said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 9:23 PM, Blogger commonsenseisnowabnormal said...

Actually, happylife3, Jesus clearly states that he didnt come to change the law "not one jot or tittle" what's Jesus did was remove the loopholes and human born misconceptions of gods law. READ THE BIBLE before u comment on its meanings. If u would like to know more of what the bible says there r these buildings called churches where people who actually read the bible go on Sundays. Check one out sometime. The people don't bite

 
At 4:59 PM, Blogger The Plain Dealer said...

I've had psychological problems since my first sexual experience with a same-sex friend when I was 9. I had looked up to my same aged friend and was devastated when he blew me off after my traumatic sexualization. Of course the whole incident was a secret and no adults were around to respond that morning. I tried to kill myself for no known reason in the wake, maybe because I was hurt by my friend bailing out on me. His family even moved halfway across the country shortly thereafter. I turned to food for comfort. The food turned me into a fat kid. I was laughed at by girls and even threatened for my attractions. Thus I always wanted to be in another guy's body. My relationships, to this day, that are close to males that I find to be fun and attractive are constantly destroyed even if I just mention their high desirability. They are guys too and they know that leads to sex.

I have really strong genes from my dad who had 8 kids and a genius mind. He was a doer and he did it. I highly doubt it's genetic. I also have a high IQ and capable hands, but my failures to connect with myself through others put an end to my learning and social life. My friends say I'm "emo" even though I'm 28. They get angry when I text them my inner emotions because I do it so often. I've found that a lot more of what you think in your mind comes out through text than it does verbally.

The last close friend I had fled the relationship as soon as he found out. He was very active and was able to get me out and losing weight. He was very introverted and he took good care of himself. We were very close prior to my coming out to him. As a matter of fact, I think that's what made him so angry. He had gained what is worth gaining from our relationship without a sexual component and he loved me for that gain.

He was kind enough to answer me a few questions after the fact. When I told him that he motivated me and that I wanted to continue to have his good mental and physical qualities rub off on me, he said that I can do that on my own and that I don't need him. He didn't need anyone else to make him the way he is and in fact his dad died when he was 13, so he was in a lot of ways more on his own to become a man. Even if I got in great physical shape, I believe I still won't feel like a man. I'm not trying to rob him of his qualities, I just see that they do rub off when I'm close.

I thought things were great growing up, but a lot of that was material. Cars, boats, houses, grand hotels, and so forth. Maybe my friend's dad spent a lot of time making sure his kids understood themselves. His mother is extremely wealthy, so his dad's work I'm sure did not get in the way of his attention to his kids' development.

It took a lot of reading before I got the keywords that found this blog. I'm convinced it is a psychological defect. The sad part is, no matter how smart you are, you can not imagine how life would be different if a few factors or even just one were changed.

Heterosexuals come into their own as they mature. I matured with social difficulties and a body that was ridiculed. For 16 years I thought sex included friends. (Hey it was fun.) Being fat, I had few female friends. The pull of mature life never took hold of me. I just wish that it had. I tried to "straighten" myself out, but I quickly return to the thought of my friend and his most excellent qualities.

 
At 6:33 PM, Blogger Psychological Me. said...

This may have already been noted (I do not exactly have the time to read through all the previous comments). However, I have noticed that your blog is lacking references and citations, which makes me believe that this stems from your personal opinions?

 
At 6:08 PM, Blogger traveling cyst said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 8:44 PM, Blogger Mathieu Nakkach said...

Hi everyone...although many of you with different view points have SOME logic behind SOME arguments I think you are ALL going about this in a very wrong way.
How I try to simplify not only the subject of homosexuality is not whether or not I see it as ok or not. Using our minds and opinions is the worst way to actually come to any truthful conclusion as we all have different religious-cultural etc backgrounds hence making it impossible for any of us to be right -THEREFORE another way of seeing things and evaluating things must be looked upon.
How about this :
Consider yourself talking to a child and trying to explain whether ANYTHING is right or not be it homosexuality or charitable action or whatever.
How about simply following this constant rule -
If you want to know if something is wrong or right just imagine the WHOLE world doing it and if the outcome is ok then great - if not then its wrong.
In this case if the WORLD was homosexual then humanity would be over in a few generations.
Get it?
If everyone was charitable then GREAT - no more poor people etc
If you dont get this point then you have serious issues.
Also to answer the whole adoption and over population issue - The world IS big enough for double and more what we have no in terms of population but our systems in place cannot accomodate even half due to greed among a million other factors. Also the fact that we keep people alive through vaccines and do not allow the natural way of survival to be the determiner of our numbers is another factor to not ignore.By nature we shouldnt be this many.By nature there is always a balance as there is with animals and plants which even themselves out in order to keep a certain harmony.
90% or so of our current everyday problems are self caused and not there by default.
Regards,
A man who used his brain and is proud :)

 
At 11:47 PM, Blogger Ary G said...

I absolutely agree with the Poster of this Blog! i was just thinking about this recently because my ex boyfriend needed constant gratification through males in a sexual form. I found out multiple times that he was on craigslist for men wanting a "daddy". I hands down believe its psychological but then again isnt everything? anyways it is an interesting perspective but I really do think there are alot of unsolved issues behind being "homosexual". I myself have been with a girl and well it was because i was lacking motherly support. Over time i got over it and after only a week of being with her i certainly felt awkward and well could never do that again lol. So yeah over all everything in life is a way to cope with living. But I honestly feel that "homosexuals" are very angry individuals with a need/crave for attention. Which really is no problem so if anyone wants to argue this topic feel free to do so. And if you do it will be quite funny because if you feel offended then maybe you SHOULDNT BE GAYYY. anytime someone feels offended its them acting out of pure insecurity which would be a sign that maybe your not doing the right thing for yourself.

 
At 11:54 PM, Blogger Ary G said...

Oh and to the post above me... If your clearly trying to state that everyone lives their life a particular way and that there is no right or wrong how can you say that its "impossible for any of us to be right" but yet at the end you leave it off extremely arrogant and saying that you "used your brains" i mean come on now... and this is why gays tend to be angry and cocky. Im so tired of gay people trying to make it a point that they are gay i mean come on like who really actually cares?

 
At 11:37 AM, Blogger Esther Gibson said...

Hi, I'm a Sexual Ethics student in the UK and we're looking at the topic of what "causes" people to be gay. I am a straight person that is highly interested in this topic, I cannot believe the immense amount of hate on this page. I was researching for "legitimate causes" of people being gay, as homosexual is actually offensive as it was a word created to cast people out. Why should we condemn someone for being in love? I know a couple who have been together for thirteen years and are happy, they are both men and both extremely down to earth, genuine people. I know of straight people who are promiscuous and will never settle. How can you judge a whole group of people on one or two cases? Every person on this planet is different. I don't like kiwi's but my friend does, does that make them disgusting and sinful? Of course not. I know using the example of the kiwi is a little ridiculous but that is what I'm trying to put across, this whole "cause" of being gay is asinine! How do you know you are straight? What point in your life did you suddenly think, yep, I'm into girls/guys. Never! It's something that we cannot change nor "cure" Don't be hateful and accept that God made people a certain way, if he didn't want to have gay people in the world why would he have allowed it to happen? You don't go ranting about women who are not virgins on their wedding days do you? You don't go telling rapists that they have to marry that woman, do you? Why is it such an issue for people to accept gays? Racism has become less of a problem but go back fifty years and they were still being lynched? For what? Being something they couldn't change! This is the same situation! It's all bigotry and hate! Love thy neighbour as Jesus said! I just find it incredible that people can be so arrogant, using a book that was supposed to be intended for good and love to hate and discriminate! Shame on you!

 
At 9:33 AM, Blogger Big Softy said...

I can't even count the amount of stupid in this drivel.

 
At 5:13 PM, Blogger Mance Rayder said...

Whybegay: Quick question, son. Do you actually know any gay people? See, I know a fair few and they all say they were born gay. Like, every single one of them. Do you think it possible you could crowbar your mind open wide enough to accommodate the possibility that maybe, just maybe, they might know more about their own motivations than you do? I mean, I'm sure your powers of divination are fearsome indeed, and the X-Men would be lucky to have a mindreader of your calibre on their team, but when every single member of a group you're discussing disagrees with you, and especially when the subject under discussion is their own sexuality, a subject that, definitionally, they have infinitely more insight into than an outsider like you, don't you think the prudent course would be to shut the fuck up and listen to them, rather than impose your own motivations on them from without?

Mathieu Nakkach: Interesting logic. I guess that if, when assessing the ethical merits of a particular behaviour, the only relevant consideration is the extent to which it allows the species to proliferate, we should let all the rapists out of jail. After all, if we all went around raping eachother at will there'd be a lot more people in the world and humanity would never die out. Hell, if only we could just go around raping whoever we felt like we'd probably have enough people to colonise the moon by now. Here's an alternative criteria, presented for your considered opinion: If a behaviour is consensual, impinges on no-one else's rights, and doesn't affect you at all, how about you just mind your own business? Live and let live, bro. It's the way forward.

 
At 1:46 PM, Blogger MB said...

1. you never met any gay person...
2. us and homos both have people who dont use safety ... i have seen more heteros do that...
3. homosexuality is not a sin or psychological problem ...
4. if men and women are supposed to come together to reproduce according to the "so called" conventional theory....then why not lay eggs...thats more convenient...
5.heteros also have father/mother problems....
6. if people like u dont let gays express their feeling then their will be problem with expression...

 
At 9:00 AM, Blogger MidnightAllDay said...

I feel so sorry for you. If you are gay and have put this much effort into writing this blog, alongside all the other related posts, then you must truly hate yourself. If you're straight and you wrote this then you're plainly just another prejudice ignoramus.
If you do reckon you're straight but have spent this much time focussing on this issue, there are some serious red flags going on here - something tells me whatever it is your fighting against so desperately, isn't going to be suppressed for much longer.
Alongside that, your argument is illogical, prejudice, ignorant, full of holes and backed up by no evidence. Get a life, go meet someone and fall in love (whichever gender you prefer) or sign up for a serious bouts of therapy, cause it sounds like you need it sister! Peace.

 
At 6:02 AM, Blogger imguest said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 6:04 AM, Blogger imguest said...

Being gay is not a choice. It cannot be changed. Else, after seeing such hatred in the society about LBTG community, what wana fall in that category.

Just one question - Will you..straight people, can you sleep with/ stay with person of same sex.. like partners.. I know the answer is NO. Same applies to gays. They are as natural as you are. Nothing wrong in it. Homosexuality is there and will remain, its not gay genes as the father of a gay is straight and if a gay marries and give birth to child, he/she is not gay compulsorily so ppl, stop categorizing genes.

And ultimately, its choice of the individual with whom he wana spend his life, I dont think others need to bother about it. Everything is temporary here, ultimate objective of life is experience and stay happy. Love ppl and get love back.

be blissful.

 
At 10:14 AM, Blogger Christian jensen said...

I agree many gays act in an escapist way etc.

Yet you don't seem to explain how the homos are supposed to stop being homos?

 
At 8:29 PM, Blogger jekyll said...

wow.... i agree with you. homosexuality is a psychological problem. but if you even try to mention that today in 2014, people will literally crush you and try to drown you out. Majority of the Americans today will shun and hate you, because you're against their "right for freedom". just wonderful.

you wrote this piece in 2006, i really hope you still hold fast to this view.

 
At 8:53 PM, Blogger jekyll said...

i agree with you. and none of these people ever will. they will mark you with names like bigot and racist, and blind, but those who persist and transgress will meet a painful torment... you all have been warned :(

"And he turned away from them and said, "O my people, I had certainly conveyed to you the message of my Lord and advised you, but you do not like good advisors."

 
At 3:26 PM, Blogger Elizabeth Collins said...

Hi:
Well if poor father figues cause gayness, then I blame the inherent failings of a patriarchal society that propogates misogyny for a messed up society. Why ARE so many men such an irresponsible mess? And why are women so powerless to stop the abuse of children?

I think we should all work to dissolve the gender binaries that lead to abuse of children in the patriachal family system. I'm so glad you agree!

Oh, and-- love is love. Really we are souls, embodied. That is our most essential nature. The body is a mere conatiner. Your focus on body/gender is a very limited view of the human soul.

What happened in your childhood to make you so dogmatic and unloving?

Bless your heart. I'm praying for you.

 
At 2:41 PM, Blogger Khogan7 said...

WOW, that's just rude and condescending, as though i were your dog. why must this be so passionate for you, if you think it's wrong say so, past that, LET IT GO. We fight only to stop idiotic rages such as yours. And the fact that you refuse to answer questions about your post, and, go through and remove so-called "offensive"comments is hilarious. Can i remove your entire blog post, because i find it offensive. . . . nope. but your not man enough to deal when people come at you, with your own ammo. Maybe then, and this is only a suggestion from a less-than, but maybe just maybe, you shouldn't post on the internet if you can't handle the feedback. think about it, seriously.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home