History UsefulNotes / Homosexual

26th Apr '17 1:15:33 PM drwhom
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Today, being homosexual is also about politics. As with [[UsefulNotes/AmericanGunPolitics gun control]], homosexuality, its legality, its normality and its social acceptability is a SingleIssueWonk for a lot of people on both sides of the debate. In modern American politics, for example, it's valid to ask, "Would you vote against [[UsefulNotes/BarackObama an African-American presidential candidate]] just ''because'' he's African-American, regardless of his actual platform," because some people would ''actually answer Yes'' to that question (or, vice versa, that they will vote for this person on account of his race even though the voter disagrees with him on every major political standpoint). A politician's stand on homosexuality can be a similar deal-breaker.

to:

Today, being homosexual is also about politics. As with [[UsefulNotes/AmericanGunPolitics gun control]], homosexuality, its legality, its normality and its social acceptability is a SingleIssueWonk for a lot of people on both sides of the debate. In modern American politics, for example, it's valid to ask, "Would you vote against [[UsefulNotes/BarackObama an African-American presidential candidate]] just ''because'' he's African-American, regardless of his actual platform," because some people would ''actually answer Yes'' to that question (or, vice versa, that they will vote for this person on account of his race even though the voter disagrees with him on every major political standpoint). A politician's stand on homosexuality can be a similar deal-breaker.
deal-breaker. It does not help that many gay people impose tests of ideological purity to determine who is [[NoTrueScotsman authentically gay]].
28th Feb '17 11:30:22 AM johnnycade7
Is there an issue? Send a Message


A "Homosexual" is a person, of either gender, who is emotionally and sexually attracted exclusively to people of the same gender.

to:

A "Homosexual" is a person, of either gender, who is emotionally and sexually and often (though not always) romantically attracted exclusively to people of the same gender.
26th Jan '17 4:44:24 PM VanHohenheimOfXerxes
Is there an issue? Send a Message


The {{Squick}} factor is important too. Homosexuality is a concept many straight people do not understand, and as Creator/HPLovecraft put it, "the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown." Men who engage in same-sex relations, especially those on the "receiving" end of anal intercourse, are considered unmanly in most modern cultures, and sick weirdos for not appreciating the fairer sex. Suggesting that a man is gay is often the worst insult against him in any language (except, in some cases, calling him a {{virgin|Shaming}} or a {{cuckold}}). For lesbians, it's a little different but not by much. GirlOnGirlIsHot, and it's okay to ogle women making out, but seriously acknowledging a relationship between two women (ie, women who don't need love, or at least sexual fulfillment, from a man) is a no-go. And this is where you get cases of people trying to CureYourGays through torture, often incorporating TheLudovicoTechnique or RapeAndSwirch.

to:

The {{Squick}} factor is important too. Homosexuality is a concept many straight people do not understand, and as Creator/HPLovecraft put it, "the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown." Men who engage in same-sex relations, especially those on the "receiving" end of anal intercourse, are considered unmanly in most modern cultures, and sick weirdos for not appreciating the fairer sex. Suggesting that a man is gay is often the worst insult against him in any language (except, in some cases, calling him a {{virgin|Shaming}} or a {{cuckold}}). For lesbians, it's a little different but not by much. GirlOnGirlIsHot, and it's okay to ogle women making out, but seriously acknowledging a relationship between two women (ie, women who don't need love, or at least sexual fulfillment, from a man) is a no-go. And this is where you get cases of people trying to CureYourGays through torture, often incorporating TheLudovicoTechnique or RapeAndSwirch.
RapeAndSwitch.
26th Jan '17 4:43:47 PM VanHohenheimOfXerxes
Is there an issue? Send a Message


The {{Squick}} factor is important too. Homosexuality is a concept many straight people do not understand, and as Creator/HPLovecraft put it, "the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown." Men who engage in same-sex relations, especially those on the "receiving" end of anal intercourse, are considered unmanly in most modern cultures, and sick weirdos for not appreciating the fairer sex. Suggesting that a man is gay is often the worst insult against him in any language (except, in some cases, calling him a {{virgin|Shaming}} or a {{cuckold}}). For lesbians, it's a little different but not by much. GirlOnGirlIsHot, and it's okay to ogle women making out, but seriously acknowledging a relationship between two women (ie, women who don't need love, or at least sexual fulfillment, from a man) is a no-go. And this is where you get cases of people trying to CureYourGays by [[TheLudovicoTechnique torturing]] the gay out of men and {{rap|eAndSwitch}}ing the gay out of women and occasionally men.

to:

The {{Squick}} factor is important too. Homosexuality is a concept many straight people do not understand, and as Creator/HPLovecraft put it, "the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown." Men who engage in same-sex relations, especially those on the "receiving" end of anal intercourse, are considered unmanly in most modern cultures, and sick weirdos for not appreciating the fairer sex. Suggesting that a man is gay is often the worst insult against him in any language (except, in some cases, calling him a {{virgin|Shaming}} or a {{cuckold}}). For lesbians, it's a little different but not by much. GirlOnGirlIsHot, and it's okay to ogle women making out, but seriously acknowledging a relationship between two women (ie, women who don't need love, or at least sexual fulfillment, from a man) is a no-go. And this is where you get cases of people trying to CureYourGays by [[TheLudovicoTechnique torturing]] the gay out of men and {{rap|eAndSwitch}}ing the gay out of women and occasionally men.
through torture, often incorporating TheLudovicoTechnique or RapeAndSwirch.
26th Jan '17 4:42:06 PM VanHohenheimOfXerxes
Is there an issue? Send a Message


The {{Squick}} factor is important too. Homosexuality is a concept many straight people do not understand, and as Creator/HPLovecraft put it, "the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown." Men who engage in same-sex relations, especially those on the "receiving" end of anal intercourse, are considered unmanly in most modern cultures, and sick weirdos for not appreciating the fairer sex. Suggesting that a man is gay is often the worst insult against him in any language (except maybe calling him a {{virgin|Shaming}} or a {{cuckold}}). For lesbians, it's a little different but not by much. GirlOnGirlIsHot, and it's okay to ogle women making out, but seriously acknowledging a relationship between two women (ie, women who don't need love, or at least sexual fulfillment, from a man) is a no-go. And this is where you get cases of people trying to CureYourGays by [[TheLudovicoTechnique torturing]] the gay out of men and {{rap|eAndSwitch}}ing the gay out of women and occasionally men.

to:

The {{Squick}} factor is important too. Homosexuality is a concept many straight people do not understand, and as Creator/HPLovecraft put it, "the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown." Men who engage in same-sex relations, especially those on the "receiving" end of anal intercourse, are considered unmanly in most modern cultures, and sick weirdos for not appreciating the fairer sex. Suggesting that a man is gay is often the worst insult against him in any language (except maybe (except, in some cases, calling him a {{virgin|Shaming}} or a {{cuckold}}). For lesbians, it's a little different but not by much. GirlOnGirlIsHot, and it's okay to ogle women making out, but seriously acknowledging a relationship between two women (ie, women who don't need love, or at least sexual fulfillment, from a man) is a no-go. And this is where you get cases of people trying to CureYourGays by [[TheLudovicoTechnique torturing]] the gay out of men and {{rap|eAndSwitch}}ing the gay out of women and occasionally men.
26th Jan '17 4:41:06 PM VanHohenheimOfXerxes
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Since homosexuality is harmless as far as sexual abnormalities go, why is there so much hostility towards and/or disapproval of it? One interpretation has to do with conditions people have lived in through history. In the past, child mortality rates were horrific; on average, half of all children died before the age of five[[note]]Today, it's one in twenty, and that's the the lowest it's ever been; just sixty years ago, it was three in twenty[[/note]]. DeathByChildbirth was also a major risk, which was even worse because it killed not only the mother, but every child she might have had thereafter. Long story short, you wanted every able-bodied male and female available to be involved in the process of continuing the species. Men and women not interested in reproducing (because they wanted to get busy with their own sex exclusively) added nothing to the process. It should be pointed out that in many cultures, however, having gay sex ''on the side'' was okay (in fact, sometimes man-on-man sex was considered a ''virtue''. Women-on-women was seen as non-existent as it was commonly believed in patriarchal societies that AllWomenArePrudes and only have sex to procreate), or given a blind eye, as long as you were still pumping out babies.

to:

Since homosexuality is harmless as far as sexual abnormalities go, why is there so much hostility towards and/or disapproval of it? One interpretation has to do with conditions people have lived in through history. In the past, child mortality rates were horrific; horrific: on average, half of all children died before the age of five[[note]]Today, it's one in twenty, and that's the the lowest it's ever been; just sixty years ago, it was three in twenty[[/note]]. DeathByChildbirth was also a major risk, which was even worse because it killed not only the mother, but every child she might have had thereafter. Long story short, you wanted every able-bodied male and female available to be involved in the process of continuing the species. Men and women not interested in reproducing (because they wanted to get busy with their own sex exclusively) added nothing to the process. It should be pointed out that in many cultures, however, having gay sex ''on the side'' was okay (in fact, sometimes man-on-man sex was considered a ''virtue''. Women-on-women was seen as non-existent as (as it was commonly believed in patriarchal societies that AllWomenArePrudes and only have sex to procreate), or given a blind eye, as long as you were still pumping out babies.
26th Jan '17 4:39:53 PM VanHohenheimOfXerxes
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Since homosexuality is harmless as far as sexual abnormalities go, why is there so much hostility towards and/or disapproval of it? One interpretation has to do with conditions people have lived in through history. In the past, child mortality rates were horrific; an average of ''one child in two'' died before the age of five[[note]]Today, it's one in twenty, and that's the the lowest it's ever been; just sixty years ago, it was ''three'' in twenty[[/note]]. DeathByChildbirth was also a major risk, which was even worse because it killed not only the mother, but every child she might have had thereafter. Long story short, you wanted every able-bodied male and female available to be involved in the process of continuing the species. Men and women not interested in reproducing (because they wanted to get busy with their own sex exclusively) added nothing to the process. It should be pointed out that in most cultures, however, having gay sex ''on the side'' was okay (in fact, sometimes man-on-man sex was considered a ''virtue''. Women-on-women was seen as non-existent as it was commonly believed in patriarchal societies that they had no sexual desires and only had sex to procreate), or given a blind eye, as long as you were still pumping out babies.

to:

Since homosexuality is harmless as far as sexual abnormalities go, why is there so much hostility towards and/or disapproval of it? One interpretation has to do with conditions people have lived in through history. In the past, child mortality rates were horrific; an average on average, half of ''one child in two'' all children died before the age of five[[note]]Today, it's one in twenty, and that's the the lowest it's ever been; just sixty years ago, it was ''three'' three in twenty[[/note]]. DeathByChildbirth was also a major risk, which was even worse because it killed not only the mother, but every child she might have had thereafter. Long story short, you wanted every able-bodied male and female available to be involved in the process of continuing the species. Men and women not interested in reproducing (because they wanted to get busy with their own sex exclusively) added nothing to the process. It should be pointed out that in most many cultures, however, having gay sex ''on the side'' was okay (in fact, sometimes man-on-man sex was considered a ''virtue''. Women-on-women was seen as non-existent as it was commonly believed in patriarchal societies that they had no sexual desires AllWomenArePrudes and only had have sex to procreate), or given a blind eye, as long as you were still pumping out babies.



The {{Squick}} factor is important too. Homosexuality is a concept many straights do not understand, and it's always been human nature to fear/hate the unknown. Men who engage in same-sex relations, especially those on the "receiving" end of anal intercourse, are considered unmanly in most modern cultures, and sick weirdos for not appreciating the fairer sex. Suggesting that a man is gay is often the worst insult against a man in any language. For lesbians, it's a little different but not by much. GirlOnGirlIsHot, and it's okay to ogle women making out, but seriously acknowledging a relationship between two women (ie, women who don't need love, or at least sexual fulfillment, from a man) is a no-go. And this is where you get cases of people trying to [[RealMenGetShot torture]] the gay out of men and {{rape|AndSwitch}} the gay out of women, and occasionally men.

to:

The {{Squick}} factor is important too. Homosexuality is a concept many straights straight people do not understand, and it's always been human nature to fear/hate as Creator/HPLovecraft put it, "the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown. unknown." Men who engage in same-sex relations, especially those on the "receiving" end of anal intercourse, are considered unmanly in most modern cultures, and sick weirdos for not appreciating the fairer sex. Suggesting that a man is gay is often the worst insult against a man him in any language.language (except maybe calling him a {{virgin|Shaming}} or a {{cuckold}}). For lesbians, it's a little different but not by much. GirlOnGirlIsHot, and it's okay to ogle women making out, but seriously acknowledging a relationship between two women (ie, women who don't need love, or at least sexual fulfillment, from a man) is a no-go. And this is where you get cases of people trying to [[RealMenGetShot torture]] CureYourGays by [[TheLudovicoTechnique torturing]] the gay out of men and {{rape|AndSwitch}} {{rap|eAndSwitch}}ing the gay out of women, women and occasionally men.
17th Oct '16 7:16:55 PM DrY9K
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Many animal species include homosexual members, just like humans do; and since it's such a widespread phenomenon, biologists theorize that homosexuality in a population must be an adaptive trait despite the stigma. When the population equals or exceeds the food supply, homosexual (and asexual) members of a population can contribute to the well-being of the community, but do not add more children. The end result is that the children of the straight and bi members of the population have a better environment and a better chance of surviving because there are more people to support each child. Infant mortality goes down, the next generation is smaller but healthier. And, of course, there is nothing to necessarily prevent homosexual people from reproducing themselves, even if the opposite sex isn't their preference (after all, as mentioned above, it was socially enforced that all people, regardless of desire, would have children--women especially). In other species, homosexuality actually does have very relevant evolutionary traits: in social mammals, like dolphins and lions, same-sex behavior helps reduce aggression among males, while in birds like black swans and seagulls, studies show that more chicks survive if raised by couples composed of the physically stronger sex (males in swans, females in seagulls). If this theory is correct, improved acceptance of gays and lesbians should eventually help mitigate the problem of overpopulation in crowded countries. [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleiotropy Pleiotrophy]] may also be a factor, as the same gene can produce different phenotypes depending on other factors, including the carrier's biological sex. A direct correlation has often been found between a woman's ease of conceiving and carrying a child to term with the likelihood that her male relatives will be gay. So even if a gay man is not fathering any children himself, his mother, sisters, and female cousins will still ensure the continuation of the family line.

to:

Many animal species include homosexual members, just like humans do; and since it's such a widespread phenomenon, biologists theorize that homosexuality in a population must be an adaptive trait despite the stigma. When the population equals or exceeds the food supply, homosexual (and asexual) members of a population can contribute to the well-being of the community, but do not add more children. The end result is that the children of the straight and bi members of the population have a better environment and a better chance of surviving because there are more people to support each child. Infant mortality goes down, and the next generation is smaller but healthier. And, of course, there is nothing to necessarily prevent homosexual people from reproducing themselves, even if the opposite sex isn't their preference (after all, as mentioned above, it was socially enforced that all people, regardless of desire, would have children--women especially). In other species, homosexuality actually does have very relevant evolutionary traits: in social mammals, like dolphins and lions, same-sex behavior helps reduce aggression among males, while in birds like black swans and seagulls, studies show that more chicks survive if raised by couples composed of the physically stronger sex (males in swans, females in seagulls). If this theory is correct, improved acceptance of gays and lesbians should eventually help mitigate the problem of overpopulation in crowded countries. [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleiotropy Pleiotrophy]] may also be a factor, as the same gene can produce different phenotypes depending on other factors, including the carrier's biological sex. A direct correlation has often been found between a woman's ease of conceiving and carrying a child to term with the likelihood that her male relatives will be gay. So even if a gay man is not fathering any children himself, his mother, sisters, and female cousins will still ensure the continuation of the family line.
17th Oct '16 7:15:16 PM DrY9K
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Many animal species include homosexual members, just like humans do; and since it's such a widespread phenomenon, biologists theorize that homosexuality in a population must be an adaptive trait despite the stigma. When the population equals or exceeds the food supply, homosexual (and asexual) members of a population can contribute to the well-being of the community, but do not add more children. The end result is that the children of the straight and bi members of the population have a better environment and a better chance of surviving because there are more people to support each child. Infant mortality goes down, the next generation is smaller but healthier, and the genes for homosexuality are passed down to the next generation through their siblings, who are more likely to survive because of the improved environment. And, of course, there is nothing to necessarily prevent homosexual people from reproducing themselves, even if the opposite sex isn't their preference (after all, as mentioned above, it was socially enforced that all people, regardless of desire, would have children--women especially). In other species, homosexuality actually does have very relevant evolutionary traits: in social mammals, like dolphins and lions, same-sex behavior helps reduce aggression among males, while in birds like black swans and seagulls, studies show that more chicks survive if raised by couples composed of the physically stronger sex (males in swans, females in seagulls). If this theory is correct, improved acceptance of gays and lesbians should eventually help mitigate the problem of overpopulation in crowded countries. [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleiotropy Pleiotrophy]] may also be a factor, as the same gene can produce different phenotypes depending on other factors, including the carrier's biological sex. A direct correlation has often been found between a woman's ease of conceiving and carrying a child to term with the likelihood that her male relatives will be gay. So even if a gay man is not fathering any children himself, his mother, sisters, and female cousins will still ensure the continuation of the family line.

to:

Many animal species include homosexual members, just like humans do; and since it's such a widespread phenomenon, biologists theorize that homosexuality in a population must be an adaptive trait despite the stigma. When the population equals or exceeds the food supply, homosexual (and asexual) members of a population can contribute to the well-being of the community, but do not add more children. The end result is that the children of the straight and bi members of the population have a better environment and a better chance of surviving because there are more people to support each child. Infant mortality goes down, the next generation is smaller but healthier, and the genes for homosexuality are passed down to the next generation through their siblings, who are more likely to survive because of the improved environment.healthier. And, of course, there is nothing to necessarily prevent homosexual people from reproducing themselves, even if the opposite sex isn't their preference (after all, as mentioned above, it was socially enforced that all people, regardless of desire, would have children--women especially). In other species, homosexuality actually does have very relevant evolutionary traits: in social mammals, like dolphins and lions, same-sex behavior helps reduce aggression among males, while in birds like black swans and seagulls, studies show that more chicks survive if raised by couples composed of the physically stronger sex (males in swans, females in seagulls). If this theory is correct, improved acceptance of gays and lesbians should eventually help mitigate the problem of overpopulation in crowded countries. [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleiotropy Pleiotrophy]] may also be a factor, as the same gene can produce different phenotypes depending on other factors, including the carrier's biological sex. A direct correlation has often been found between a woman's ease of conceiving and carrying a child to term with the likelihood that her male relatives will be gay. So even if a gay man is not fathering any children himself, his mother, sisters, and female cousins will still ensure the continuation of the family line.
1st Jul '16 12:02:26 PM HighCrate
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Relatedly, you may hear some people claim that homosexuality, and indeed sexual orientation in general, is a ''choice''--as in, "You don't ''have'' to be gay, you just ''want'' to." This attitude has more grounding in theology than anything else. Modern UsefulNotes/{{Christianity}} is one of those religions that believes homosexuality is a sin. Christianity also holds that sins are actions which a person chooses to commit. In theory, it is always possible to ''not'' sin (the execution is obviously a bit more suspect). So, if homosexuality is a sin, the ensuing InsaneTrollLogic is therefore that it must also be a choice. The alternative--that homosexuality is ''not'' a sin--has yet to be taken seriously in high Christian theology (though there has been a softening on the issue from "boots on the ground" priests who work closely with rank-and-file Christians, amongst them the reigning pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Francis). Even worse, the Insane Troll Logic ''does'' have a kernel of truth in it: though one may have sexual appetites, it ''is'' possible to control them ("ImAManICantHelpIt" apologists notwithstanding). And the human mind is a very powerful thing; we can bend ourselves to almost any task, if we choose to. Hence the rise of "pray the gay away" programs that seek to actively recondition people into being straight. So, yes: FromACertainPointOfView, homosexuality is a choice. One ''can'' {{brainwash}} it away. The question of whether one ''should'' has yet to be settled definitively.

to:

Relatedly, you may hear some people claim that homosexuality, and indeed sexual orientation in general, is a ''choice''--as in, "You don't ''have'' to be gay, you just ''want'' to." This attitude has more grounding in theology than anything else. Modern Many modern branches of UsefulNotes/{{Christianity}} is one of those religions believe that believes homosexuality is a sin. Christianity They also holds hold that sins are actions which a person chooses to commit. In theory, it is always possible to ''not'' sin (the execution is obviously a bit more suspect). So, if homosexuality is a sin, the ensuing InsaneTrollLogic CircularReasoning is therefore that it must also be a choice. The alternative--that homosexuality choice. There also exists a slightly more nuanced viewpoint claiming that having homosexual urges is ''not'' a sin--has yet to be taken seriously not, in high Christian theology (though there has been a softening itself, sinful, but that acting on the issue from "boots on the ground" priests who work closely with rank-and-file Christians, amongst them ''is'', which resolves the reigning pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Francis). Even worse, the Insane Troll Logic ''does'' have a kernel of truth in it: though one may have sexual appetites, it ''is'' possible CircularReasoning (since actions definitely ''are'' choices), but for obvious reasons is usually seen as hair-splitting to control them ("ImAManICantHelpIt" apologists notwithstanding). And the human mind those outside those particular belief systems. All this is complicated by differences between official doctrine and how a very powerful thing; we can bend ourselves to almost any task, if we choose to. Hence the rise of "pray the gay away" programs that seek to actively recondition people into being straight. So, yes: FromACertainPointOfView, homosexuality particular faith is a choice. One ''can'' {{brainwash}} it away. The question of whether one ''should'' has yet to be settled definitively.
actually practiced by common practitioners.
This list shows the last 10 events of 39. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=UsefulNotes.Homosexual