|
|
Post by spritznar on May 26, 2013 16:21:38 GMT
But then you're just inverting the traditional double-standard; it becomes gay people who are automatically believed about their gayness and straight people who have to "prove" that they are indeed straight. That doesn't sound healthy. ... no i'm not? i said queer which is not the same as gay. i actually think some degree of bisexuality is the "norm". And we still find an overwhemingly majority of straight in, say, anonymous surveys, so this goes beyond what people are willing to publicly admit in front of social pressure. but as long as people think "gay" is a bad thing, they'll resist associating it with themselves, even to themselves. this is becoming less common, but it still happens, consciously and subconsciously. I don't see why this is problematic either; in animal species where homosexuality exists (not talking about species that reproduce asexually or parthenogenetically, I mean here the existence of homosexual behaviour in species that exclusively use male-female sexual reproduction), it never seems to be a majority of the cases. again, didn't say homosexuality was the majority, i said queer which is pretty much "everything not straight" The fact that homosexual practices have a special (not necessarily negative) status in the majority of human cultures does seem to imply it's a marked, non-default, and thus minoritary behavior. you seriously don't think homosexuality has a negative status? i think this is the end of this conversation because i don't know what planet you're living on If staightness wasn't majoritary, even then, most people have the belief and perception than it is, and they act according to those beliefs. so, empirical evidence be d@mned then? we should just let them believe that if they want to? i'm not sure what you're trying to say here and i should have left for work 5 minutes ago |
|
|
|
Post by lordofpotatoes on May 26, 2013 17:02:32 GMT
Someone mentioned Annie' sexuality in this thread earlier, and I was reminded of this page: www.gunnerkrigg.com/?p=1036Maybe this is a bit late, but I guess this is still relevant. |
|
|
|
Post by legion on May 26, 2013 17:49:47 GMT
But then you're just inverting the traditional double-standard; it becomes gay people who are automatically believed about their gayness and straight people who have to "prove" that they are indeed straight. That doesn't sound healthy. ... no i'm not? i said queer which is not the same as gay. i actually think some degree of bisexuality is the "norm". If you believe that bi is the norm, then you do believe that a large part of the majority of people who identify as straight are lying or mistaking. But surely you should also believe that of gay people, since you seem to imply that anything that isn't 100% straight or 100% gay is bi (even if they're 99.99% straight/gay, nope, the remaining 0.01% means they are wrong about saying they're straight/gay and they are really bi). Again, this isn't how those labels work. They are not scientific, essentialist categories you impose on people based on measured threshold of sexual attraction. They are social groups to which people chose to adhere on a personal and individual basis. So if the majority say they're straight, then the majority is straight; telling them otherwise is no better than telling a gay person that it's "just a phase". Replace homosexuality with queer, my case doesn't change: queer behavior in animals, when present, is minoritary. I live on a planet where people have enough reading comprehension to understand the subtle differences in meaning between "not necessarily negative" and "almost never negative"; before acting all self-righteous and morally superior, it would be nice not to grossly misread and misrepresent my point. I haven't made a moral judgement; a false belief may be very bad, sure; but in the meantime, if a false belief is present in the majority of the population, you have to be aware of it and understand it if you hope to understand how people think and why they act the way they act, especially if you hope to change that belief. What I really don't like about ideology is how oponents (which are often "anyone who doesn't share the ideology") are reduced to irrational, raging lunatics or blind, stupid, uninformed puppets. Real people are complex, real people have many reasons to believe what they believe and to act the way they act. In real life there are intelligent and knowledgable racists, intelligent and knowledgable homophobes, intelligent and knowledgable islamists. Sure, it's easier to paint people as mindless puppets, their strings pulled by the heterosexist patriarchic fabric of society, while confortably seeing yourself as the only free spirit, able to think past dogmas and preconceived ideas which are the food of all the sheep around you. But that's completely delusional. |
|
|
|
Post by Lightice on May 26, 2013 18:08:23 GMT
Replace homosexuality with queer, my case doesn't change: queer behavior in animals, when present, is minoritary. That depends on the species, actually. Many animals have sex with anything in the general shape of their own species while in heat, and many others aren't even that selective. Then there are the species which use sex as means of social interaction, such as the bonobo, which are universally bisexual. It won't do to make generalisations concerning the entire animal kingdom with any subject of human social values, or in fact any biological preconceptions. You'll nearly always end up being mistaken if you make too wide claims. |
|
|
|
Post by warrl on May 26, 2013 23:42:23 GMT
Replace homosexuality with queer, my case doesn't change: queer behavior in animals, when present, is minoritary. That depends on the species, actually. Many animals have sex with anything in the general shape of their own species while in heat, and many others aren't even that selective. Then there are the species which use sex as means of social interaction, such as the bonobo, which are universally bisexual. I've also read that the majority of sexual activity in giraffes is male homosexuality. And pretty much any time you have two bottlenose dolphins, there is sex play going on. Regardless of gender. If you only have one, you don't want to bet heavily against sex play. |
|
