For those who believe homosexuals can change their orientation.... - Page 6

Elizabeth502 · #76 Sep 21, '11, 8:35 am

I love it when straight people come onto message boards to "correct" those with SSA about their terminology, their experience, their reality. Cute.

EasterJoy · #77 Sep 21, '11, 8:49 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elizabeth502

I love it when straight people come onto message boards to "correct" those with SSA about their terminology, their experience, their reality. Cute.

You know that these other posters to this very Catholic forum do not suffer from SSA attraction themselves....how? Because they talk about homosexuals in the third person?

You may be right, but consider that you may also be a bit naive. You may be vastly underestimating the number of poeple posting here who really do have their own dog in this fight (or fear that they do). After all, one of the main selling points of the internet is the amount of privacy it allows one to maintain.

Elizabeth502 · #78 Sep 21, '11, 8:54 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by EasterJoy

You know that these other posters to this very Catholic forum do not suffer from SSA attraction themselves....how? Because they talk about homosexuals in the third person?

EJ, I'm talking about the many posters on this and other message boards who have identified themselves as permanently heterosexual (and often married) individuals. No, they're not latent/closet gays.

I'm distinguishing these from the ones michelle correctly describes, and many of us on CAF have also interacted with, who may be temporarily questioning their sexuality and do come on here to post.

Quote:

You may be right, but consider that you may also be a bit naive.

Not.

EasterJoy · #79 Sep 21, '11, 9:22 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elizabeth502

EJ, I'm talking about the many posters on this and other message boards who have identified themselves as permanently heterosexual (and often married) individuals. No, they're not latent/closet gays.

I'm distinguishing these from the ones michelle correctly describes, and many of us on CAF have also interacted with, who may be temporarily questioning their sexuality and do come on here to post.

Not.

If you say so. For the record, though, parenthood is not proof of typical sexuality.

I know at least one married father of children who decided after 20 years that he needed to be in a dress and be addressed as "she" in order to happily continue his high school teaching job. He is undergoing hormone therapy and at last report hoped to have the outward indications of his gender surgically altered. You know there are others who are not transexual or transvestite, but who are homosexual, but they get married and have kids, anyway, because they decide they want to or think they're supposed to. Some of them do not go through a midlife crisis, abandon their marriages, and find a same-sex partner. Some stick it out for life. It is amazing what you can accomplish, when you put your mind to it.

And no, I'm not saying that changing who you are attracted to is one of those things that you can automatically do by "putting your mind to it". I'm saying that the history of arranged marriage, if nothing else, proves that when the social mileu is right, marriage, procreation and mutual personal attraction do not have to go together.

Yes, a lot of the people posting here are heterosexuals. I fail to see how it is that they have no stake in deciding the terminology describing homosexuality. It is not as if homosexuals can expect to have the floor to themselves when the subject is homosexuality, any more than the parents have found it remotely possible to command the floor with regards to childrearing, but whatever.

I just think it is a good idea to remember that there is no physical test that can prove sexual orientation one way or the other. As long as that is true, then sexual orientation will be like pain: self-report will be very hard to prove or disprove, and that inability to provide independent confirmation will mean that all self-reports will be more or less subject to suspicion. It can't be helped.

kbwall · #80 Sep 21, '11, 9:27 am

I always found the term SSA to be annoying and silly. Annoying because all it does is create confusion, especially in debates like this where people try to claim to be ex-gay, which would involve turning straight, when in all that they are doing is just being celibate. Turning straight is a pretty big deal. Being celibate, eh, not so much, because we all know it can be done.

Homosexual is an orientation. There are many people with it, and people have variety, so homosexuals come in all shapes and sizes and walks of life. Trying to use the term SSA is just going by stereotypes. You don't have to be a fairy princess (or a lumberjack if you're female) to be homosexual. homosexuals can be football players as well as hair dressers. Homosexual is not a lifestyle, it is an orientation and you can do whatever you choose to deal with it.

It's similar to heterosexuality. Hetereosexuals don't get a stupid acronym when they go celibate. And there is no difference between a celibate heterosexual and a celibate homosexual.

And I suspect the reason you don't find many people who identify as gay, and are celibate is because people usually don't go celibate, regardless of orientation. That's just the society we live in.

EasterJoy · #81 Sep 21, '11, 9:37 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbwall

I always found the term SSA to be annoying and silly. Annoying because all it does is create confusion, especially in debates like this where people try to claim to be ex-gay, which would involve turning straight, when in all that they are doing is just being celibate. Turning straight is a pretty big deal. Being celibate, eh, not so much, because we all know it can be done.

Homosexual is an orientation. There are many people with it, and people have variety, so homosexuals come in all shapes and sizes and walks of life. Trying to use the term SSA is just going by stereotypes. You don't have to be a fairy princess (or a lumberjack if you're female) to be homosexual. homosexuals can be football players as well as hair dressers. Homosexual is not a lifestyle, it is an orientation and you can do whatever you choose to deal with it.

It's similar to heterosexuality. Hetereosexuals don't get a stupid acronym when they go celibate. And there is no difference between a celibate heterosexual and a celibate homosexual.

And I suspect the reason you don't find many people who identify as gay, and are celibate is because people usually don't go celibate, regardless of orientation. That's just the society we live in.

I think it is widely known that homosexuality does not imply a particular exterior appearance. People generally use the term SSA to make it clear that they do not belong to the stereotype that says that all homosexuals are (or want to be) sexually active.

michelleds · #82 Sep 21, '11, 9:46 am

From the Episcopal Commission for Doctrine of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops' "Pastoral Ministry to Young People withSame-Sex Attraction" (June 2011)

Quote:

In this document the expression “person with same-sex attraction” refers to one who feels an erotic and emotional attraction, which is predominant and not merely episodic, towards persons of the same sex, whether with or without sexual relations. The terms “gay” and “lesbian” are not used to define people in the Church’s official teachings and documents. Although these words are common terms in current speech, and many people use them to describe themselves, they do not describe persons with the fullness and richness that the Church recognizes and respects in every man or woman. Instead, “gay” and “lesbian” are often cultural definitions for people and movements that have accepted homosexual acts and behaviours as morally good.

Elizabeth502 · #83 Sep 21, '11, 10:02 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by EasterJoy

parenthood is not proof of typical sexuality.

No one said that. You're stretching, and trying to get this thread off-topic.

Quote:

I know at least one married father of children who decided after 20 years that he needed to be in a dress and be addressed as "she" in order to happily continue his high school teaching job. He is undergoing hormone therapy and at last report hoped to have the outward indications of his gender surgically altered.

That has nothing to do with homosexuality. Speaking of naivete, in your post you conflated three separate things: homosexuality, transvestitism, and transgenderism. Sometimes these last two are related, but not always.

Quote:

Yes, a lot of the people posting here are heterosexuals. I fail to see how it is that they have no stake in deciding the terminology describing homosexuality. It is not as if homosexuals can expect to have the floor to themselves when the subject is homosexuality,

My gosh. Any other straw men you'd like to construct? I never said that. I said, and I repeat, people who have never experienced SSA are not the experts on the experience of it, the struggle against it, and the terminology of it The people who have it, and/or have experimented with homosexual activity, are the ones with valid and credible testimony, not the ones without it. The point is that there's often a vigorous attempt to silence, censor, or edit comments by people with SSA, by those without it, whenever the subject comes up on multiple message boards.

michelleds · #84 Sep 21, '11, 10:09 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by EasterJoy

Yes, a lot of the people posting here are heterosexuals. I fail to see how it is that they have no stake in deciding the terminology describing homosexuality.

a lot of people posting here are white. i fail to see how it is that they have no stake in deciding the terminology describing blacks.

a lot of people posting here are americans. i fail to see how it is that they have no stake in deciding the terminology describing lithuanians.

a lot of people posting here are accountants. i fail to see how it is that they have no stake in deciding the terminology describing pilots.

see how silly that sounds?

michelleds · #85 Sep 21, '11, 10:20 am

I want to parse this out with even more clarity from my posts above.

Quote:

person with same-sex attraction” refers to one who feels an erotic and emotional attraction, which is predominant and not merely episodic, towards persons of the same sex, whether with or without sexual relations.

That is both a definition and an exclusion.

According to this document, if someone says that they are SSA, then we know what they mean. It does not include the “passing fancy”, “drunk encounter”, or “youthful experimentation” scenario.

Then, the document continues to explain why we don’t use “gay” or “lesbian”.

Quote:

The terms “gay” and “lesbian” are not used to define people in the Church’s official teachings and documents. Although these words are common terms in current speech, and many people use them to describe themselves, they do not describe persons with the fullness and richness that the Church recognizes and respects in every man or woman. Instead, “gay” and “lesbian” are often cultural definitions for people and movements that have accepted homosexual acts and behaviours as morally good.

So, a person who was gay or lesbian but then came into the fullness of the Catholic Church would no longer self-identify as gay or lesbian. He or she might not self-identify as “straight” either, for a number of reasons (which can be addressed in a separate post if need be). Therefore, this person would identify as a person with SSA. But what if, through the Grace of God, this person did not actually experience SSA anymore. Is this person now “straight” just because he or she is no longer experiencing the temptation of SSA? Would you consider that dishonest or disingenuous?

Please tell me what word or phrase this person should use in these discussions?

kbwall · #86 Sep 21, '11, 6:42 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by EasterJoy

I think it is widely known that homosexuality does not imply a particular exterior appearance. People generally use the term SSA to make it clear that they do not belong to the stereotype that says that all homosexuals are (or want to be) sexually active.

That doesn't change the fact that it's still a mindset that only thinks of stereotypes.

erine · #87 Sep 22, '11, 10:07 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wowbagger

I don't believe homosexuals can generally change their orientation. An alcoholic can stop drinking; he can't stop wanting to.

Just wanted to get that out there, lest some outsider pops along and thinks Catholicism officially teaches that homosexuality is a choice or something.

Alcoholics have the desire to drink removed by God all the time. I have loved ones in AA who don't drink and say God removed the craving. Just wanted to clear that up.

Dakota Roberts · #88 Sep 22, '11, 10:58 pm

I wish God would remove these feelings, life would be so much easier. I've never fantasized about sex with another guy, indeed I find the concept repugnant, but I'm still attracted to a guy in my college class. Part of me wants to tell him that I love him just so he stays away from me, but then I'd feel like I've betrayed his trust. So much stress.

Elizabeth502 · #89 Sep 22, '11, 11:32 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota Roberts

I wish God would remove these feelings, life would be so much easier.

I'm not triviliazing this, but know that whatever agonies we experience (mine are different from yours), these are potential avenues of sanctity for us. An "easy" (or easier) life is not what sanctifies us.

Dakota Roberts · #90 Sep 22, '11, 11:43 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elizabeth502

I'm not triviliazing this, but know that whatever agonies we experience (mine are different from yours), these are potential avenues of sanctity for us. An "easy" (or easier) life is not what sanctifies us.

It causes so much heartache and anguish, some nights I sob myself to sleep. The night being oh so dark does not help the feeling of isolation.