I have one problem with the statement "homosexuality is not a choice", or perhaps how it's often used. It feels to me like conceding ground to even answer a question that shouldn't be asked. Why does homosexuality need to be ineveitble to be acceptable? And for those of us who are bisexual and can be seen in light of this question as being able to 'choose' -- why should it even be under discussion?
I think homosexuality should be conceptualized as a neutral quality in and of itself, deserving of toleration and undeserving of oppression, not as a negative quality that can't be helped and so there's no point trying to change it.
*rereads* I hope this is clear, as I have to dash. *laugh at myself*
Old argument - at least as old as the reformation: are we defined by what we do, or by internal traits which may not be expressed or visible.
Since your position on this is inconsistent, and since the inconsistencies don't conform to any known algorithm (or at least not any algorithm that I know about) your argument is categorized as biased.
Your making it not because it proceeds logically from your beliefs, but because you have a personal bias in support of homosexuality.
Moreover, it only works (logically) if you presume an axiom that homosexuality is an internal trait; while that may be a common understanding within our linguistic community, it is far from universal or self-evident.
If it was people saying, "Homosexuality is a choice," wouldn't exist.
In my opinion: we do not have a choice about what we feel, but we do have a choice about what we do about it. Many of our rights are based on the limits that can, and should not be, placed on what we do about what we feel. In other words, I have the right to express my anger, but not to express it by physically attacking you (unless, for example, I'm responding to a physical attack from you, in which case I have the right to defend myself); likewise, I have the right to express my sexual desire, but not by fucking someone who doesn't, or can't, consent.
It's entirely appropriate to have a discussion / argument about whether gender is an justifiable reason to limit the expression of sexual desire; while I share your position in that debate, I'm less inclined to use tactics designed to make fun of (humiliate) my opponents.... but then, I'm not a great fan of humiliation.
I could also say a great deal more about the right(s) to express ones feelings, but I've promised not to go there with you for several months, so I won't
If you have to CHOOSE to write right-handed -- or if you have the "choice" forced on you, usually in childhood -- you're a leftie. And... so what? (Besides the established harm of forcing that "choice".
There's a challenge put out by Dan Savage, of Savage Love fame, regarding that very claim, that homosexuality is a choice.
Basically, Dan challenges any straight man who's convinced that being homosexual is a conscious, deliberate choice to blow him, whilst the head-giver maintains a diamond-hard erection of his own. Basically, prove it by 'choosing' to be homosexual for fifteen minutes, and then going back to his utterly straight 'chosen' orientation.
Honestly, I don't see how it proves anything, except that the head-giver is loads more queer than he thinks. *shrug* Also, that Dan Savage is just like every other man out there, gay, straight, or other: he really likes getting head. Heh.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2011-07-13 12:55 pm (UTC)I think homosexuality should be conceptualized as a neutral quality in and of itself, deserving of toleration and undeserving of oppression, not as a negative quality that can't be helped and so there's no point trying to change it.
*rereads* I hope this is clear, as I have to dash. *laugh at myself*
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2011-07-13 02:38 pm (UTC)Since your position on this is inconsistent, and since the inconsistencies don't conform to any known algorithm (or at least not any algorithm that I know about) your argument is categorized as biased.
Your making it not because it proceeds logically from your beliefs, but because you have a personal bias in support of homosexuality.
Moreover, it only works (logically) if you presume an axiom that homosexuality is an internal trait; while that may be a common understanding within our linguistic community, it is far from universal or self-evident.
If it was people saying, "Homosexuality is a choice," wouldn't exist.
In my opinion: we do not have a choice about what we feel, but we do have a choice about what we do about it. Many of our rights are based on the limits that can, and should not be, placed on what we do about what we feel. In other words, I have the right to express my anger, but not to express it by physically attacking you (unless, for example, I'm responding to a physical attack from you, in which case I have the right to defend myself); likewise, I have the right to express my sexual desire, but not by fucking someone who doesn't, or can't, consent.
It's entirely appropriate to have a discussion / argument about whether gender is an justifiable reason to limit the expression of sexual desire; while I share your position in that debate, I'm less inclined to use tactics designed to make fun of (humiliate) my opponents.... but then, I'm not a great fan of humiliation.
I could also say a great deal more about the right(s) to express ones feelings, but I've promised not to go there with you for several months, so I won't
Kiralee
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2011-07-13 03:53 pm (UTC)If you have to CHOOSE to write right-handed -- or if you have the "choice" forced on you, usually in childhood -- you're a leftie. And... so what? (Besides the established harm of forcing that "choice".
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2011-07-13 06:25 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-07-13 11:43 pm (UTC)Basically, Dan challenges any straight man who's convinced that being homosexual is a conscious, deliberate choice to blow him, whilst the head-giver maintains a diamond-hard erection of his own. Basically, prove it by 'choosing' to be homosexual for fifteen minutes, and then going back to his utterly straight 'chosen' orientation.
Honestly, I don't see how it proves anything, except that the head-giver is loads more queer than he thinks. *shrug* Also, that Dan Savage is just like every other man out there, gay, straight, or other: he really likes getting head. Heh.
(no subject)
From: