I have a new theory on homosexuality (specifically male homosexuality).
I believe people for sure are gay in that they are highly inclined toward liking other men. But are they born that way? I doubt it.
It seems a lot of gay men have had sort of broken or isolated childhoods and seem to turn to the gay scene as an easy form of love of acceptance and even validation which they haven’t really had before.
I also sort of object to the way the gay lifestyle is portayed in the media. Mostly the idea that they are happy and festive people, because the more I see of it (and based off several gay friends I have) it just strikes me as something to fill a massive hole in their lives/souls.
How can you judge the whole gay community off a couple of your friends. Even so society is historically agaisnt gays, with killings and parents exiling their children. This could casue people to feel worthless when their own family rejects them.
No, it is not true, and it is one of the many myths about gay people that all or most of them come from broken homes and did not receive the love of caring parents. The vast majority of gay people have had typical home lives the same as the general population, neither better nor worse. For most, there has been no domineering mother, absent father, or abusive parents.
However, your final statement is probably more correct. That is, there are plenty of gay people who are not so “gay” or happy with their lives. This is due not only to the discrimination they may face but also the very fact of being outside the mainstream of society in a significant way. In other words, they lack self-worth and feel ostracized even when they are not although, it should be clear, that there are still subtle forms of discrimination against gay people, and some not so subtle. OTOH, there are also plenty of gay people who are quite happy with their (sexual) lifestyle. Some may be more activist and others less so, but the latter are, for the most part, also content with the strides gay people have made with regard to civil rights.
I believe men for sure are straight in that they are highly inclined toward liking women. But are they born that way? I doubt it.
It seems a lot of straight men have had sort of broken or isolated childhoods and seem to turn to the hetero scene as an easy form of love of acceptance and even validation which they haven’t really had before.
I also sort of object to the way the straight lifestyle is portayed in the media. Mostly the idea that they are happy and festive people, because the more I see of it (and based off several straight friends I have) it just strikes me as something to fill a massive hole in their lives/souls.
Best way for you to find out for sure is to talk frankly with school teachers ,
They can tell by a child’s mannerisms , the way they behave , walk , talk , interact ,
This isn’t true 100% of the time, but a fair percentage of the time they can tell who has a greater possibility to go one way or the other , so yes , in my humble opinion ,
Many are Born Homosexual ,
There was one particular boy my eldest son went to school with ,
I picked him as a strong probability , I was correct,
Plus a boy my second son went to school with was 100 % homosexual at school,
And that was before High school,. His Parents had him in Counselling at a young age
Sexual attraction is not an arbitrary or random thing. Certainly something about in our human design pre-orients us to in time experience attraction to the opposite sex. SSA must be some perturbation of this normal development. Whether the source of the perturbation is genetic, biological or psychological/experiential or a combination of these is unknown.
I’ve spent a lot of time on Caf – until recently, pretty much just on the Non-Catholic Religions forum, but recently I’ve read some conversations about homosexual persons. This is the first time I’ve heard “Is homosexuality just emptiness?” here but it doesn’t surprise me. It seems
like every stereotype or negative thought about homosexual persons will eventually appear on this forum, if it hasn’t already.
That’s not the OP argument, so really it’s off-topic. But it also fails - it could be used with any minority. It doesn’t follow that left-handedness must be some perturbation of the normal development just because the majority are right-handed.
The conclusion doesn’t follow from the premise. The issue seems to be the assumption “our human design”. You’d have to prove that Homo sapiens is designed. Then I guess do that “lips were not designed to play clarinets so clarinets are unnatural” argument.
I think there’s been so many threads on this that everything has been said. Some girls like girls and some boys like boys. Don’t see the problem.
I don’t know if it’s best to try to form such a broad theory on something as delicate and personal as this.
I’m not sure how I feel about the broken childhood aspect. Many people have broken childhoods and other broken aspects of their development. I think it’s unfortunate to group all homosexual persons into this category. Maybe some sort of brokenness in upbringing affects some people - such as abuse, or loneliness, or disproportionate parental relationships. But it’s not helpful to claim to know how all people are.
I know you’re just forming a theory so as to better approach this difficult subject. But I have homosexual attraction, and I promise you, IF I am gay because of some brokenness in my childhood – fine, that may be true – BUT at the same time, in no way can I honestly pinpoint any event or condition in my childhood that would easily correlate to such brokenness. What I mean, essentially, is that my childhood seemed fairly normal to me. I had friends, close family, and good parents.
Could I be missing something? Of course. But it’s not good to generalize here.
Secondly, the brokenness experienced in the subsequent homosexual lifestyle could in fact be a symptom of how unfulfilling a gay lifestyle is. At the same time, for many, it could also correlate with some sense of shame that has been placed on them from external factors – church teaching, society, bullies, friends, taboo. I’m not saying that this is correct, for I think the church has important things to say about authentic human fulfillment. However, I think it’s undeniable that Christianity can oftentimes promote this disproportionate sense of guilt when it comes to sexual acts.
And lastly, not all gay people are so promiscuous. This whole issue is fairly recent in society, so gay persons must experiment with finding an acceptable home. This means the gay community has a loud voice, and is often the only safe place for gay people.
Until the church and others continue to promote a healthier alternative for gay people, or do so in a more convincing way, then LGBT people will look for other homes.
My post was to clarify that your “turning around” of the OP’s post is not valid. It is not equally “reasonable” for persons to engage in sexual acts with the same sex as with persons of opposite sex. There is no comparison with handedness.
Next - heterosexuality is not deemed “normal” by virtue of being in the majority - but by virtue of reasoned observation. Two men exchanging their gametes makes no sense at all. The intended venue for the male ejaculate is evident by simple observation. Thus your remark about minorities misses the point entirely.
I only substituted, without changing the logic, so the logic of my version is as valid as the original.
“Normal” is defined as “conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected” so it’s relative to who decides the standard or decides what’s typical or expected.
Your remarks about bodily functions still assume design. There is no intention in evolution. But in any event, there are various acts in straight sex involving “unintended” venues, and heteros are in a majority, and those acts are far more prevalent. Yet there have been few if any threads on that. Seems like double standards.
I think I explained myself clearly. Observation of our bodies leads to obvious conclusions about sexual intercourse. Gametes are included in male ejaculate. Is this not suggestive of anything? Boy + Boy or Boy + Girl - which one of these seems consistent with the presence of gametes in ejaculate?