If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
I'm not using it to describe gay sex. I'm using it to describe homosexuality. And even then, I'm only suggesting the possibility, I'm not actually using it to refer to homosexuality. Why exactly do you find the use of "disorder" disturbing, but are presumably perfectly happy to use it to refer to other things that occur naturally?
From dictionary.com:
"An ailment that affects the function of mind or body: eating disorders and substance abuse."
Therefore describing homosexuality as a sexual disorder indicates the speaker considers homosexuality to be an illness of sorts.
Yeah disorder is not the right term for it. Possibly unnatural, or wrong, but not an illness or a disorder.
Wow! You're going to endear yourself to a lot of people - NOT! :banghead:
And considering that the world's best scientists aren't exactly unanimous about the causes of homosexuality, wouldn't it be a bit presumptious on your part to state that it isn't an ailment similar to any other psychological condition? Again, would you consider paedophilia to be the same as homosexuality in that respect?
It's absolutely anything but unnatural and wrong.
Not really, no.
Why not?
Because in the case of paedophilia there are other issues to consider, such as the lack of psychological maturity and often the physical impediments children would face if they were to have sexual relations.
Irrelevant, you are talking about the act of having sex with a child there.
Paedophilia is the sexual attraction to children. It is no different in that sense to sexual attraction to men, women or even animals.
Please explain why homosexuality is "unnatural"...
So from that point of view paedophilia is no more of a disorder than heterosexuality, I'm With Stupid.
However, as we have already established sexual attraction is entirely in keeping with nature and can be evidenced in the behaviour of other species...
I would argue that plenty of the things that we would refer to as a "disorder" are just as naturally occuring as homosexuality. In fact everything that occurs is naturally occuring, or it wouldn't happen. And normally what we call a disorder is something which hinders or prohibits procreation (either directly, or by making us less capable of survival). What makes someone being born infertile a disorder, and someone being born gay not? Both occur naturally in the animal kingdom. I have suggested one explination, which I think has some promise as a theory, but it's by no means conclusive.
Not any sexual practice. Any accident of birth. Any genetic difference. Being born blind would hinder survival (and therefore procreation), so we would refer to it as a disorder. Being born infertile wouldn't hinder survival, but would hinder procreation, and so we would refer to it as a disorder. I'm not saying homosexuality is a disorder, but it might be.
But an illness, such as blindness, means that the part of the body affected will have an abnormailty of behaviour.
That is the difference.
the greeks and romans had a lot of gay sex, they also had a lot of sex in general
i'd say it was partially cultural thing how people behave and whom they like, but also partially how you are as an individual, either in mental development or genetically as to what sex you prefer
so someone could be generally pretty straight or gay but still do the opposite in the right cultural setting
Lol. Welcome to religion.
Well, I guess if you are gay, and you get the opp, it isn't homosexuality anymore? But... if you don't want it... well, you're fucked.
Ah, I love these little illogical situations. Nothing like extremist religious nuts to provide them too.
Dear god. What would Iran make of the traps on certain *chan sites.