Defining natural

[Booze Zombie]

Actually, homosexuallity is natural. It's a recorded behavior since before human made chemicals or genetic tinkering could've altered our state of being.

 

[Echo3Delta]

I like the arguments I see here. I'm what you would (incorrectly) call a homophobe. I use gay slurs, find the lifestyle disgusting, and oppose their agenda. But I see that I can't defend to your standards an argument based on the nature of man (that is, the physical nature). And of course a religious argument would be worse than useless in this game.

No, you've helped me to realize that the real disagreement here, for anyone willing to dig deep enough to find, is cultural. That is where the compelling points are to be made and rebutted. It's a cultural conflict between the "traditionalists" and the "progressives" if you will. I suspect that debate is for a different thread though. You've proved to my satisfaction the impotence of the "It's not natural" argument. Well done.

 

[dreadedcandiru99]

I created this thred to vent my frustration towards all of the people who condemn homosexuality by saying "It's not natural".

How do we define naturality anyway?
Doesn't mankind continously go against nature in everything it does?
Is driving a car natural? Is playing a videogame natural? Is getting married natural?
If we were to define natural as something that happens in nature then no, none of these actions are natural.

Surely human beings discarded naturality when they started inventing, creating and pretty much abbandoning the whole "survival of the fittest" way of life.

If we were to define natural as something that is possible to do then yes, all of these actions and consequentially even homosexuality is natural.

What I'm getting at is I don't get the whole "Homosexuality is unnatural" way of though, maybe one of you could explain this to me.

As for me, I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation, not just for why homophobes should be allowed to decide what is or isn't natural, but also why "naturality" matters. Even if homosexuality weren't natural, so what? Why should it have to be? It still doesn't have any impact on the lives of the people who ***** about it.

So two guys can't make a baby. Neither can a heterosexual couple, if one or both of them is sterile. Does that make them unnatural too, and should they be condemned for it as well? Besides, there are over six billion people on this planet, and we'll be up to nine billion by 2050. Why do we need more babies? It's not like we're running out.

And hey, how's this for an example of something that isn't natural: jamming tubes and wires into a woman whose brain turned to oatmeal years ago in order to keep her alive, in defiance of her stated wishes to the contrary, sheer common sense, and, yes, nature itself. Mention this to the average it's-just-not-natural homophobe and see how much they care about what's natural then.

When homophobes say that gays are unnatural, the odds are that they're actually thinking, "Look, I don't want them to have what I have because, well, I just don't like them, okay? Because they're icky."

 

[jonnopon3000]

I created this thred to vent my frustration towards all of the people who condemn homosexuality by saying "It's not natural".

How do we define naturality anyway?
Doesn't mankind continously go against nature in everything it does?
Is driving a car natural? Is playing a videogame natural? Is getting married natural?
If we were to define natural as something that happens in nature then no, none of these actions are natural.

Surely human beings discarded naturality when they started inventing, creating and pretty much abbandoning the whole "survival of the fittest" way of life.

If we were to define natural as something that is possible to do then yes, all of these actions and consequentially even homosexuality is natural.

What I'm getting at is I don't get the whole "Homosexuality is unnatural" way of though, maybe one of you could explain this to me.

WELL SAID. Seriously, it bugs me too...i am not gay but like i really don't like people who sit there and just say "i dont like gays" and when u ask why either just say causei dont or go "cause it's wrong". Who defines wrong and right? It is nothing to do with them, its each person's own decision how to live, there is nothing anyone else can, or should do abour it. I agree also, humans are no longer natural in almost anything they do-so whats so wrong with homosexuality?

I have been trying to fabrivcate a thread like this for myself, but thatnks for this one-i get so worked up about it i couldn't find the words

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

You've proved to my satisfaction the impotence of the "It's not natural" argument. Well done.

Thank you, granted though, it is one of the weaker arguments against homosexuality so it wasn't that difficult.
It's just that I've heard it so many times I felt like I needed to post a rebuttal.

I have been trying to fabricate a thread like this for myself, but thanks for this one-i get so worked up about it i couldn't find the words

I had been kicking around the idea for a couple of days, but I couldn't get the wording wright.
Then I just had some inspiration and it all came naturally.

 

[Talendra]

Homosexuality is used naturally in animals as population control, and to be honast I would not be surprised if the growing number of homosexuals in the world would not only have to do with the growing acceptance, and also be in part just that, there are far too many people in the world at the moment.
Though you all do make a good point about so many things that we use every day being unnatural.

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

Homosexuality is used naturally in animals as population control, and to be honast I would not be surprised if the growing number of homosexuals in the world would not only have to do with the growing acceptance, and also be in part just that, there are far too many people in the world at the moment.

That's a theory I had, that homosexuality is nature's population control.
Then again that sounds kind of stupid.

 

[Dogmeat T Dingo]

Women don't really do that.... you must be joking... I've never met a woman who thought two gay men having sex was interesting...and this is coming from a guy living 45 minutes from San Francisco.

Somebody has never been to FanFiction.net

Seriously, I know quite a few women who think gay guys are utterly hot. Don't know why you haven't found any. And no, lesbian sex is no different, I hate to break it to you. Straight women regard lesbians the same way straight men regard gays. It's naturally repulsive simply because it's a sex act your brain chemistry doesn't find arousing.

 

[InProgress]

I agree with Max on the whole public display of affection thing. Get a room or get out of my visual area. That goes to homosexuals as well as heterosexuals. As for defining natural I'm going to say how it's been created, be it man, woman, dog, flying whale, etc. I agree with the OP on the whole idea of "is driving a car or playing games natural?" no, it's not natural, but people have grown used to it and use the term "natural" in order to describe "accustomed to". It's semantics.

 

[Echo3Delta]

You've proved to my satisfaction the impotence of the "It's not natural" argument. Well done.

Thank you, granted though, it is one of the weaker arguments against homosexuality so it wasn't that difficult.
It's just that I've heard it so many times I felt like I needed to post a rebuttal.

Understandable. So many on my side think so little and say so much (not saying that there aren't those on the other side too), that I tend to be frequently labeled a Bible-thumper or bigot before I've finished my first half-sentence. It's because of those small-minded individuals on both sides who use weak and simplistic arguments (because they're easier to memorize, I assume) that the conversation can't be more civil and thought-provoking.

Ah well, I guess considering the discussion from an unfamiliar angle and using your head before your heart can also seem quite unnatural to some.

 

[Booze Zombie]

That's a theory I had, that homosexuality is nature's population control.
Then again that sounds kind of stupid.

How so? Humanity adjusts to it's environments, if that environment happens to be overpopulated then it makes sense that perhaps some instinct or gene kicks in to safeguard against an unsustainable population.

I had also imagined that it might be some form of "alpha" behavior from our ancestors, kind of like how dogs hump your leg to say that they own you... but not leg humping.

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

That's a theory I had, that homosexuality is nature's population control.
Then again that sounds kind of stupid.

How so? Humanity adjusts to it's environments, if that environment happens to be overpopulated then it makes sense that perhaps some instinct or gene kicks in to safeguard against an unsustainable population.

I just think that the notion that human genes are aware of the world population is kind of silly.
Then again I'm not a scientist so it probably shouldn't be up to me to define what's silly and what isn't.

 

[James Buchanan]

You know what's unnatural? Telling people how or what to think

People will work stuff out in their own way and time, if given the opportunity. It may involve them trying out options or it may just be something that makes sense to them because of whatever reasons are intrinsic to who they are.

Its not worth worrying about how other people feel about other people, how other people like to get nasty with other people or whatever. That's what they like to do and good for them. Just worry about what you like doing and achieving that.

 

[James Buchanan]

I just think that the notion that human genes are aware of the world population is kind of silly.
Then again I'm not a scientist so it probably shouldn't be up to me to define what's silly and what isn't.

I would contend that social conditioning is infinitely more significant in personality development than genetic predisposition. But, that's a different argument altogether.

 

[Talendra]

This most likely is the scientific 'disorder' where a man, or women, can be born with the opposite sexs brain, as their are differences between the two, meaning you literally have a man trapped in a woman's body. I regard this as natural homosexuality.

Yes, because a woman obviously cannot like football and gun's yet still be a woman.
I like shooting (targets only), I ride a motorcycle, I have a girlfriend. Well shit, guess I am really a guy, better go order that sex change.
Oh hang on, I also like wearing dresses and am quite feminine, I don't think that will go too well with my new bod.

 

[GothmogII]

This most likely is the scientific 'disorder' where a man, or women, can be born with the opposite sexs brain, as their are differences between the two, meaning you literally have a man trapped in a woman's body. I regard this as natural homosexuality.

Yes, because a woman obviously cannot like football and gun's yet still be a woman.
I like shooting (targets only), I ride a motorcycle, I have a girlfriend. Well shit, guess I am really a guy, better go order that sex change.
Oh hang on, I also like wearing dresses and am quite feminine, I don't think that will go too well with my new bod.

Before getting all angsty and taking offence, this person, who you don't know, is male in every way apart from sex. She has always liked football and male activities since she was very young, which is more than almost every other lesbian who discovered/chose to be a lesbian later on in their lives. You can't deny there are male activities and female activities, as much as there are male & female cars & fashion. This person is in every way a guy - shit, I mistook her for a guy when I was walking down the street & she has been rejected from clubs as the bouncers haven't believed her when they saw her ID says female. There is NOTHING feminine about her, hence why it really is (and it's a scientifically proven disorder) a male brain trapped inside a female body.

Umm...then that -isn't- strictly speaking homosexuality at all then is it? 0_o I mean, if this condition is as you say: Male trapped in Female body...then logically their attraction to the seemingly 'same' sex isn't really homosexuality, but heterosexuality coupled with the fact that the person isn't physically different from the sex that attracts them?

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

Natural, in this case, has to do with reproduction.

Obviously men cannot reproduce with men, therefore men were not ment to fornicate with men.

So are you also against condoms and heterosexual anal and oral sex?
Are you against people who just don't want to have kids?
Are you against sterile couples?
If sex is only for reproduction then you must be against all of these things too.

 

[Booze Zombie]

I just think that the notion that human genes are aware of the world population is kind of silly.
Then again I'm not a scientist so it probably shouldn't be up to me to define what's silly and what isn't.

I don't know if the genes are "aware", but there is most likely a very advanced chemical and gene related reaction to overpopulation.

Let's say "Mary" has 5 children, the fourth and fifth may have genes saying that the mother had 3/4 (respectively) other children before them, so that might increase their chances of being "gay" or perhaps even not interested in sex at all.

A gene doesn't have to have a mind to alter us.

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

Natural, in this case, has to do with reproduction.

Obviously men cannot reproduce with men, therefore men were not ment to fornicate with men.

So are you also against condoms and heterosexual anal and oral sex?
Are you against people who just don't want to have kids?
Are you against sterile couples?
If sex is only for reproduction then you must be against all of these things too.

Re-read what i said. If you still think those questions apply, then ask them again.

So are all of those things unnatural?

 

[Booze Zombie]

Natural, in this case, has to do with reproduction.

Obviously men cannot reproduce with men, therefore men were not ment to fornicate with men.

As I've said before, I'm not against homesexuals, but they're simply un-natural. they can do what they want, all power to them, but it's really quite simple!

If they were not natural, they would not ocour without genetic modifcation or the alteration of nature it's self.