By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Argentina Legalizes Gay Marriage and Adoption, 1st country in Latin America

Khuutra on 19 July 2010
Slimebeast said:
Khuutra said:

"Attraction to the opposite sex (at the expense of attraction to the same sex)" should be undnerstood as heterosexuality, otherwise you are bisexual. Heterosexuality is by nature an attraction to the opposite sex and not the same sex. You are not describing homophobia with that qualifier. Not wanting to hav homosexual relations does not indicate any degree of homophobia, it just indicates heterosexuality.

Well, just change the nut licking part with watching two men tongue kissing with each other or somethung.

That's still heterosexuality. I have no desire to see men kiss each other, but that isn't the same thing as being actively against said kissing. A lack of attraction is not the same thing as revulsion.



Around the Network
Slimebeast on 19 July 2010
dtewi said:
Slimebeast said:
dtewi said:
Slimebeast said:

"somewhat" regarded? They're strongly correlated to DNA expression.

Bolded: that's heavily debated and among the expertise it nowadays clearly leans towards inheritance playing the bigger part. At least in the medical field it does. And there's recent studies that strongly support this, studies that show that human happiness doesn't correlate very well at all with your circumstances, your social position or how lucky or unlucky you are in life, but is determined by your natural predisposition.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2008/03/06/happiness-is-in-the-genes-say-scottish-scientists-86908-20341535/

The researchers found that those who do not excessively worry and who are sociable and conscientious tend to be happier - and that these traits are as much as 50 per cent controlled by genetics, with external factors such as relationships, health and careers contributing to differences in happiness.

Look, 50% is determined by genetics. And 50% is environment.

Where's it say genes are the larger factor as you are clearly implying?

Happiness doesn't correlate with circumstances... are you serious? If I was living in the streets, I'd be miserable. If I was in a penthouse with $500 million in the bank, I'd be pretty damn happy.

Don't twist those facts when they're not saying what you're saying at all.

Don't put words into my mouth. I didn't say it doesn't. But relatively speaking happiness doesn't correlate well with circumstances, no.

Yeah, happiness correlates (in that study) to 50% with the environment, but I never said otherwise. I implied it though, the last sentence in that post was unlycky (Ill edit it). My main point was ti point to this stude to prove that the happiness hormones that lestatdark was talking about will have an even smaller correlation to the environment since I just proved that happiness, which is determined by so much more than just serotonine and dopamine, is no more than 50% determined by the environment.


"that's heavily debated and among the expertise it nowadays clearly leans towards inheritance playing the bigger part. At least in the medical field it does."

Forgive me, but you sorta said that genes>environment for happiness there.

No I didn't. Not for happiness, I said genes>environment for those hormones (the "happiness hormones").

I clearly addressed the bolded part of lestatdark's post:
"So while those traits can be somewhat regarded to DNA expression, the environment plays the larger role in controlling the levels of those hormones."



Slimebeast on 19 July 2010
sapphi_snake said:
Khuutra said:
Slimebeast said:
Khuutra said:

Hold up. You can't equate heterosexuality with homophobia, that undermiens the meaning of the latter word. Attraction to the opposite sex is not the same thing as revulsion felt toward homosexuals.

I don't. Nowhere in that post did I refer to heterosexuality per se. Nothing about attraction whatsoever. Re-read the aversion part which is (partly) the root of homophobia.

"Attraction to the opposite sex (at the expense of attraction to the same sex)" should be undnerstood as heterosexuality, otherwise you are bisexual. Heterosexuality is by nature an attraction to the opposite sex and not the same sex. You are not describing homophobia with that qualifier. Not wanting to hav homosexual relations does not indicate any degree of homophobia, it just indicates heterosexuality.

The thimg about Slimebeast is that he equates "heterosxuality" with "repulsion towards homosexual acts" (for example he thinks that seeing two men kissing should automatically cause a heterosexual man to throw up).

For him the ideea of heterosexuals simply being indifferent towards homosexaul acts is inconcievable, because he equates "indifference towards homosexual acts" to "bisexuality". For him if you have to be repulsed by gays to be staright.

No no no. I clearly said the majority of heterosexuals, and in another post refering to the same phenomenon I used the word a "typical" heterosexual male. And I've used the word population to underline that I am generalizing.

Absolutely yes, of course you can be straight and indifferent and neutral towards homosexual acts.



dtewi on 19 July 2010
Slimebeast said:
dtewi said:
Slimebeast said:
dtewi said:
Slimebeast said:

"somewhat" regarded? They're strongly correlated to DNA expression.

Bolded: that's heavily debated and among the expertise it nowadays clearly leans towards inheritance playing the bigger part. At least in the medical field it does. And there's recent studies that strongly support this, studies that show that human happiness doesn't correlate very well at all with your circumstances, your social position or how lucky or unlucky you are in life, but is determined by your natural predisposition.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2008/03/06/happiness-is-in-the-genes-say-scottish-scientists-86908-20341535/

The researchers found that those who do not excessively worry and who are sociable and conscientious tend to be happier - and that these traits are as much as 50 per cent controlled by genetics, with external factors such as relationships, health and careers contributing to differences in happiness.

Look, 50% is determined by genetics. And 50% is environment.

Where's it say genes are the larger factor as you are clearly implying?

Happiness doesn't correlate with circumstances... are you serious? If I was living in the streets, I'd be miserable. If I was in a penthouse with $500 million in the bank, I'd be pretty damn happy.

Don't twist those facts when they're not saying what you're saying at all.

Don't put words into my mouth. I didn't say it doesn't. But relatively speaking happiness doesn't correlate well with circumstances, no.

Yeah, happiness correlates (in that study) to 50% with the environment, but I never said otherwise. I implied it though, the last sentence in that post was unlycky (Ill edit it). My main point was ti point to this stude to prove that the happiness hormones that lestatdark was talking about will have an even smaller correlation to the environment since I just proved that happiness, which is determined by so much more than just serotonine and dopamine, is no more than 50% determined by the environment.


"that's heavily debated and among the expertise it nowadays clearly leans towards inheritance playing the bigger part. At least in the medical field it does."

Forgive me, but you sorta said that genes>environment for happiness there.

No I didn't. Not for happiness, I said genes>environment for those hormones (the "happiness hormones").

I clearly addressed the bolded part of lestatdark's post:
"So while those traits can be somewhat regarded to DNA expression, the environment plays the larger role in controlling the levels of those hormones."

Well you said it was heavily debated, so who are you to judge for him taking the opposing side of the issue?



Kimi wa ne tashika ni ano toki watashi no soba ni ita

Itsudatte itsudatte itsudatte

Sugu yoko de waratteita

Nakushitemo torimodosu kimi wo

I will never leave you

Khuutra on 19 July 2010
Slimebeast said:
sapphi_snake said:

The thimg about Slimebeast is that he equates "heterosxuality" with "repulsion towards homosexual acts" (for example he thinks that seeing two men kissing should automatically cause a heterosexual man to throw up).

For him the ideea of heterosexuals simply being indifferent towards homosexaul acts is inconcievable, because he equates "indifference towards homosexual acts" to "bisexuality". For him if you have to be repulsed by gays to be staright.

No no no. I clearly said the majority of heterosexuals, and in another post refering to the same phenomenon I used the word a "typical" heterosexual male. And I've used the word population to underline that I am generalizing.

Absolutely yes, of course you can be straight and indifferent and neutral towards homosexual acts.

Generalizing requires statistics to have any degree of validity. Could you back up the idea that the majority of heterosexuals are homophobic?



Around the Network
Slimebeast on 19 July 2010
Khuutra said:
Slimebeast said:
Khuutra said:

"Attraction to the opposite sex (at the expense of attraction to the same sex)" should be undnerstood as heterosexuality, otherwise you are bisexual. Heterosexuality is by nature an attraction to the opposite sex and not the same sex. You are not describing homophobia with that qualifier. Not wanting to hav homosexual relations does not indicate any degree of homophobia, it just indicates heterosexuality.

Well, just change the nut licking part with watching two men tongue kissing with each other or somethung.

That's still heterosexuality. I have no desire to see men kiss each other, but that isn't the same thing as being actively against said kissing. A lack of attraction is not the same thing as revulsion.

Exactly. And that's the key thing here. Heterosexuality only means "lack of attraction" towards the same sex. You need a different term to describe the repulsion that is prevalent, and therefore I use the term homophobia.



Khuutra on 19 July 2010
Slimebeast said:
Khuutra said:

That's still heterosexuality. I have no desire to see men kiss each other, but that isn't the same thing as being actively against said kissing. A lack of attraction is not the same thing as revulsion.

Exactly. And that's the key thing here. Heterosexuality only means "lack of attraction" towards the same sex. You need a different term to describe the repulsion that is prevalent, and therefore I use the term homophobia.

My point is that you are not describing revulsion. You are describing a lack of attraction.



sapphi_snake on 19 July 2010

@ Slimebeast

What Khuutra said, and please provide studies that include men from non-western countries like Japan or China.



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

Slimebeast on 19 July 2010
Khuutra said:
Slimebeast said:
sapphi_snake said:

The thimg about Slimebeast is that he equates "heterosxuality" with "repulsion towards homosexual acts" (for example he thinks that seeing two men kissing should automatically cause a heterosexual man to throw up).

For him the ideea of heterosexuals simply being indifferent towards homosexaul acts is inconcievable, because he equates "indifference towards homosexual acts" to "bisexuality". For him if you have to be repulsed by gays to be staright.

No no no. I clearly said the majority of heterosexuals, and in another post refering to the same phenomenon I used the word a "typical" heterosexual male. And I've used the word population to underline that I am generalizing.

Absolutely yes, of course you can be straight and indifferent and neutral towards homosexual acts.

Generalizing requires statistics to have any degree of validity. Could you back up the idea that the majority of heterosexuals are homophobic?

For clarification, homophobic in the sense that they feel a certain level of repulsion. I am convinced it's a majority. I can't back it up with hard evidence though, but I'm sure there's studies of it on the internet.



dtewi on 19 July 2010
Slimebeast said:

For clarification, homophobic in the sense that they feel a certain level of repulsion. I am convinced it's a majority. I can't back it up with hard evidence though, but I'm sure there's studies of it on the internet.

Well, find them.



Kimi wa ne tashika ni ano toki watashi no soba ni ita

Itsudatte itsudatte itsudatte

Sugu yoko de waratteita

Nakushitemo torimodosu kimi wo

I will never leave you