Why be gay?

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

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

How homosexuality is an abuse, denigration, discrimination, perversion and sexual compulsion

Having sex without the intention for procreation is already blind pleasure seeking. Some people have said that the intention to have sex with their (girl/boy) friends is to strengthen their bonds together. But surely there are other ways besides having sex to form a closer bond to people?

Does this mean that people who have sex make the strongest bonds, and those who don't make weaker bonds? Well the kind of bonds are in question, whether they are bonds for trust, love or just a bond for physical intimacy and lust?

From dictionary.com, the meaning of perversion is, "the action of perverting something (turning it to a wrong use); "it was a perversion of justice".(I chose the most subtle meaning).

So the definition of perversion is to turn a function into a wrong use. It is to misuse and abuse an object or person.

Having sex with the opposite sex without procreation is already a perversion, a misuse of the sex organs for blind pleasure. Having "sex" with the same gender would make it more perversive than opposite gender sex.

So homosexual sex is more perversive than heterosexual sex. Paedophilia sex would thus be even more perversive than same age homosexual sex.

Misusing of the sex organs is already a perversion, so homosexuality is infact a perversion. And perversions are caused by psychological disorders. They are disorders of failing to recognise the true functions of objects or people. This makes homosexual and heterosexual people who misuse their organs as having psychological disorders.

This blog's focus is on homosexuality as a perversion because it is more perversive than heterosexual non-procreation sex, and because same genders cannot possibly perform sexual intercourse in the technical sense. They misuse a non-sexual part of the body for "sex", this already fits the definition of perversion, which is the misusing of a body part for "sex". And this "sex" is a false sex without the possibility of procreation.

So homosexuals are not only being perverted, they are also being false. There are more truthful ways of forming trust, closer relationships and bonds with other people besides putting a part of oneself into the body of another while having the brain stimulated for pleasure. It is just misusing other people's bodies for pleasure. But is the function of people's bodies for the pleasuring of oneself? This is to disrespect another human being and to treat them as mere pleasure machines.

Men already disrespect women when they see women as pleasure servants, when men view the same of other men, they are disrespecting their own kind. This makes homosexuality more perversive than heterosexuality non-procreation sex.

Many men who already view women as sex objects are already practising a bad discrimination and desrespecting women's rights, and when homosexuals view men as sex objects, they are being worse than the men who desrespect women, because they desrespect their own gender and children of their own gender as well.

If men disrespect their own and view their own as sex objects, how disrespectful and degenerative is this? It is the same as your own family disrespecting you. It is a betrayal of the respect of the same gender. This is why many people distrust homosexuals and don't like to be physically close to them because people feel their intentions are not respectful and questionable. How does one know whether they are just friendly or are flirting themselves?

Many heterosexuals mix with their opposite gender homosexuals friends because they realise that their opposite gender homosexual friends would not try to hit on them, as opposite gender heterosexuals might do. On the other hand, heterosexuals would not feel safe with same gender homosexuals because they feel the same distrust as they feel towards the opposite gender, but they would be more wary and cautious.

People who cannot abstain themselves from sex are having sexual compulsive disorder and a disorder is a psychological problem. They have the need to continually misuse another person's body for their perversion. I have already mentioned in an earlier blog post as to why people have sex. They want sex to fulfill their needs for security, trust, comfort, pleasure, intimacy, distraction from threats etc Until homosexuals can find what they require from sex from other proper avenues, as well as abstain themselves from sex, they would always be deemed as suffering from sexual perversion and sexual compulsive disorder, both which are psychological disorders.

6 Comments:

At 10:34 PM, Blogger longantree said...

"Having sex without the intention for procreation is already blind pleasure seeking." A fallacy of denying the antecendent. If the intention is not there, it does not exclude other reasons besides pleasure seeking. And you yourself have said that a possible reason is "to strengthen their bonds together". "But surely there are other ways besides having sex to form a closer bond to people?" Of course, there exists the possibility of other ways, but that the possibility exists does not mean that sex to strengten bonds is not an acceptable reason.

"Having sex with the opposite sex without procreation is already a perversion, a misuse of the sex organs for blind pleasure." This conclusion is true, if your premises were true. And since your premises are flawed, your conclusion is false too.

"Same genders cannot possibly perform sexual intercourse in the technical sense. They misuse a non-sexual part of the body for 'sex'" In the technical sense? And what exactly is that? "Non-sexual"? And who defines a part to be sexual or otherwise? Perhaps you may perceive the part in question to be non-sexual, but most assuredly some do not share your view, in which case your argument does not apply to them, since they do not agree with your definitions.

"And this 'sex' is a false sex without the possibility of procreation." This is a classic example of there being an unwarranted assumption: that the only acceptable reason to have sex is for the purpose of procreation.

"There are more truthful ways of forming trust, closer relationships and bonds with other people besides putting a part of oneself into the body of another while having the brain stimulated for pleasure." Then why do you argue mainly against homosexuality? Most, if not all, heteosexual couples also engage in sex. And not all of these couples intend to have children. Will you denounce these people as "false"?

"This is to disrespect another human being and to treat them as mere pleasure machines." Again, you are reasoning that sex for pleasure alone is disrespectful. Why should this be so? If both partners want sex for the pleasure, and they consent to each other, is that disrespectful?

"Men already disrespect women when they see women as pleasure servants, when men view the same of other men, they are disrespecting their own kind." True, true... if these men do view other men as pleaure servants rather than men. You beg the question; another fallacy occurs.

"People who cannot abstain themselves from sex are having sexual compulsive disorder and a disorder is a psychological problem." True again... but the way you argue implies that homosexuals cannot abstain themselves from sex, which is another unwarranted assumption.

"Until homosexuals can find what they require from sex from other proper avenues, as well as abstain themselves from sex, they would always be deemed as suffering from sexual perversion and sexual compulsive disorder, both which are psychological disorders." Funnily enough, homosexuals are not deemed as suffering from psychological disorders by the relevant authorities, which would include professional psychologists. So are you one such to claim that homosexuals are in fact suffering from psychological disorders?

P.S. I was overjoyed when you said you might discontinue writing on the subject of homosexuality... but it seems that I have to resign myself to pointing out the fallacies that abound in your argument for the sake of the not-so-discerning readers (no offence intended to these readers, of course).

 
At 10:56 PM, Blogger ~[z][x]~ said...

False Assumptions all over, WBG:

1. People should only have sex for the mere reason of pro-creation

Why? And who are you to make this claim? Are heterosexual couples who have sex with contraceptive devices afflicted with "psychological disorders"?


2. Mis-using of sex organs is a perversion

Once again, who are you to dictate what is the "right use" of someone else's organs? I would agree that biologically, sex organs are meant for pro-creation. But similarly, one's legs are meant for one to get around places. Do you then consider football, where people use their legs to kick a ball all over the place, a perversion?


3. All homosexuals have sex

This is simply not true. So are you simply against homosexual sex or are you against homosexuality?

 
At 11:25 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

I feel strongly learning the topic, however I need to learn more on this topic.
Carry on your updates..!!

Regards

Tongkat Ali, sexual product, erection food

 
At 12:21 PM, Blogger Mance Rayder said...

A Most Righteous Fisking - Part the First.

WhyBeGay: Your latest post, sir, is the most retarded thing I've ever read. And I actually used to work with the retarded. I, for one, am extremely happy that your nasty, spiteful, prejudiced, abysmally ignorant, and almost gleefully stupid blog is being discontinued. On to your latest drivel:

"Having sex without the intention for procreation is already blind pleasure seeking."

So what? Nothing wrong with blind pleasure seeking. Life is short. Fill your 70 odd years with as much blind pleasure seeking as you can, I say.

Have you ever been to a nice restaurant? That's nothing if not blind pleasure seeking. There's absolutely no utilitarian purpose to nice restaurants. Nice restaurants don't exist in nature. You could always buy meat in bulk and grow your own vegetables. You wouldn't starve. You should be ashamed of yourself, going to nice restaurants like a pervert! Whatever would your mother say?

"Some people have said that the intention to have sex with their (girl/boy) friends is to strengthen their bonds together. But surely there are other ways besides having sex to form a closer bond to people?"

So what if there are? Most people think sex is the best one. Who are you to question their preference? And remember, we're talking about romantic bonds here. They call it "making love" for a reason. What would you suggest instead? Cribbage?

"Does this mean that people who have sex make the strongest bonds, and those who don't make weaker bonds? Well the kind of bonds are in question, whether they are bonds for trust, love or just a bond for physical intimacy and lust?"

This made literally no sense. I could piss on an electrical outlet and bang my head off the keyboard from the involuntary spasm and still make more sense than you. Do you really think lust and love are mutually exclusive? Have you ever been in an adult relationship?

"From dictionary.com, the meaning of perversion is, "the action of perverting something (turning it to a wrong use); "it was a perversion of justice".(I chose the most subtle meaning)."

And the dictionary.com definition of 'Nature' is "The universe, with all its phenomena." Human sexuality is a phenomenon of the universe, of which homosexuality is a subset. Therefore, being gay is natural. Do you see why arguing by definition is a recognised logical fallacy yet?

 
At 12:21 PM, Blogger Mance Rayder said...

Part the Second:

"Having sex with the opposite sex without procreation is already a perversion, a misuse of the sex organs for blind pleasure."

Your hubris is astonishing. From where on earth do you feel you divine the right to dictate what is and what is not a "misuse" of sex? Our evolutionary ancestors were having sex for pleasure millennia before they knew that pregnancy was a biological consequence of it. Bonobo monkeys have sex for pleasure. Are they "unnatural?" Do you think the instinct that motivates them is a desire to procreate? Or a desire for release? I ask you in all seriousness, have you ever actually felt such an urge yourself? If you do, do you find yourself thinking "Man, I really wanna bang that chick" or "Man, I'd love to settle down in a semi-detached house and have 2.4 children with her"?

"So homosexual sex is more perversive than heterosexual sex."

If, and only if, we accept that the unavoidably vague dictionary definition of perversion can be applied to sex. Something which you've given us absolutely no reason to do, which would define virtually every human being alive as a pervert of some description, and which jibes completely with the urges people actually feel. Your powers of persuasion are not impressing me thus far.

And besides, surely "perversion" is something defined by consensus. If the majority of people find a particular expression of a particular biological urge to be perfectly sane and reasonable, by definition it can't be a perversion. If anything, you're the pervert for insisting on only having sex for procreation. By everyone else's lights, you're misusing your junk and warping your natural instincts. Pervert.

"And perversions are caused by psychological disorders. They are disorders of failing to recognise the true functions of objects or people. "

Again, you have absolutely no right whatsoever to define the "true" purpose of sex, or even to argue that it has a "true" purpose at all. How's this for a definition: The true purpose of sex is whichever one of its numerous benefits the people having it are interested in at that particular moment.

Since the rest of your post is merely a long, tedious reiteration of the same flawed argument, there's no point to further fisking. I'll sign off by merely thanking you again for discontinuing this nasty, bigoted little blog, and wishing you many years of joyless, procreative sex and as many stupid fat fucking hateful children as you can fit under your roof.

You're an idiot. And that's the King Beyond the Wall saying that.

 
At 8:18 AM, Blogger MidnightAllDay said...

I feel so sorry for you. Pity is all I can feel towards such ignorance...

 

Post a Comment

<< Home