User Avatar Image


posted by DAISHI on - last edited - Viewed by 6.9K users
So homosexual marriage finally seems like it's getting approval from the American public, to which I say Kudos! I'm firmly attracted to the female form myself, but I'd never want to keep someone from marrying someone else.
290 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • Icedhope;748123 said:
    What is a hoverhander?

    People who do this.
  • According to Urban dictionary, it's someone who makes embraces or friendly gestures (eg. hugging someone, or putting one's hand on someone's shoulder) without actually touching the other person.
  • BlankCanvasDJ;747763 said:
    I'm not sure you'd want to use the term "disease" though. There's no such thing as a good disease and, by definition, all diseases have adverse effects on the diseased. Homosexuality doesn't have an adverse effect - not a physical one, at least. It doesn't even really hinder reproduction. The need and desire to reproduce is still a part of many homosexuals (as many adopted children and surrogate mothers can attest to) and the ability to reproduce still exists. True, heterosexual desire is meant, from a natural standpoint, to increase reproduction but that doesn't mean that the desire to reproduce doesn't exist outside heterosexual desire.

    Rather than a disease, I'd just call it a personality trait.
    Yeah. Calling it a disease makes it sound like you pity the person for having it, and that they really shouldn't have it. In the current social climate regarding tolerance, it's not a good idea.

    So, not "disease." Perhaps it could be called an "abnormality" or "dysfunction." I mean that psychologically or whatever--like they have a dysfunction; not that they are, themselves, dysfunctional. "Abnormality" seems okay to me because I would define heterosexuality as normal (ie. of the norm), thus being an outlier from normal would then be abnormal.

    I wouldn't say it's "genetic" though--at least not entirely. Perhaps there is a genetic predisposition toward it, but I disagree both that it's entirely genetic and... for lack of a better word, "uncurable" (I really tried to think of a different word) as people (my cousin for example) are fully capable of first being hetero, then turning gay, and then being hetero again.

    EDIT: Someone will want to respond to this by referring to Kinsey's sexuality continuum (ie. people can be partially gay/hetero), but I'm just referring to being gay according to two factors: 1) are you presently having same-sex physical encounters; and 2) do you desire to have same-sex physical encounters.
  • Again, the current theory is that this is an epigenetics thing, not a pure genetics thing. This explains why there's a spectrum of sexualities. Depending on the amount and types of hormones a fetus receives at birth, the certain genes will be turned off and on and the sexuality of the resulting baby will be different.
  • Is it wrong when I made my Coolsome character on WWE 13 I was turned on my the charecter.
  • You know one term that really grinds my gears... "metrosexual."

    I hate that word. I mean, you could say someone is "effeminate" or "eccentric" and that's fine. But the word "metrosexual" sounds almost as retarded as "chillax."
  • but what if someone really likes subway trains
  • Rather Dashing;748257 said:
    but what if someone really likes subway trains
    Get them a year pass for Christmas.
  • coolsome;748238 said:
    Is it wrong when I made my Coolsome character on WWE 13 I was turned on my the charecter.
    It is not wrong, just very disturbing.
Add Comment