So why is it offensive to consider homosexuality as a choice?

[Darken12]

For some people, sexuality is fixed and there's nothing they can do about it. For others, sexuality is fluid, and they can be more attracted to certain people at different periods of their lives, or they can be mostly one thing but have "exceptions" or similar shades of gray.

The key is accepting that both types of people exist, and both types are represented in the GSM or LGBTQ+ spectra, and therefore ought to be taken into consideration when it comes to things like legislation and activism.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Because it's NOT a choice. You're saying they are just choosing to be discriminated against by a large percentage of the world. It's scientifically proven that it is not a choice.

 

[BNguyen]

I think, the way I see it, is that if people start to regard the matter as more of a choice rather than a latent part of your psyche, then that gives people who are not in favor of choice to impose their "correct" descisions upon those that they deem as being "wrong", so that they can project their own life choices onto others because they believe that it is "the only way"
think about it in terms of the anti-smoking, anti-food choices crowds that try and force the government to create legislation in their favor.
So yeah, in a lot of ways, by implying something this sensitive as a matter of choice, you open up the floodgates for something worse

 

[therightpirate]

OT: It's not offensive in itself, but sexuality isn't really a choice. It's something hardwired in at birth.

It's impossible to say whether it is hardwired at birth or if there is an environmental component to our sexuality. The sort of experiments needed to understand this would likely be completely unethical to perform. The human brain is complicated. More connections than stars in the universe. We will never fully understand what the reason behind various types of human sexuality might be. Beyond the sexual nature there is an emotional aspect to sex that makes sexuality even more impossible to try to understand. And how far do we start determining what is or isn't a choice. Is someone who is into Sadism born that way or is that something they choose to indulge in later in life through learned experiences and through investigating the world. I think there is a spectrum to human sexuality. There are likely people who are born with certain urges and drives and there are likely people who are curious about things and wish to indulge in them. I think there are people out there who might not have the homosexual urges that another person might have, but is curious, and through engaging in it finds it pleasurable and decides to continue. In that level there are people who probably do choose to be homosexual (though please note that this could very well be a small small slice of the general population, I'm not trying to create a label, just that there are likely people who do make a choice when it comes to this). The problem with a term like homosexuality is that is lumps many people into one broad spectrum. There are likely people who are not classical homosexuals and who do not feel an urge for homosexual sex but perhaps due to circumstance (being segregated into a single sex environment) or just sheer curiousity will indulge in homosexual activities.

So I think yes there are people who do choose homosexuality at times, but do we label these people as homosexuals or not? Or is a term like pansexual or bi-sexual a better term? It gets very complicated at a certain point. And is this a small section of the wide homosexual community or not? Certain classical definitions of homosexuality even imply that if two men were having sex with different female partners in the same room that that would indicate that they are homosexual, so things like group sex or multiple sexual partners at one time, even in other heterosexual circumstances in some definitions would mean that those people were indulging in homosexual activity. I guess the problem ultimately is labels. As stated earlier, human sexuality is complex. What one heterosexual enjoys can be vastly different from what another does. Same for the Queer community. Ultimately we need to simply embrace that human sexuality is something that's undefinable and probably far more elastic than we traditionally think. I truly think that really we are all on the same spectrum of sexuality, whether you identify as homosexual or heterosexual, but that this spectrum is incredibly broad. Just as there are many flavours and styles to food, dance, languages - sexuality is incredibly diverse amongst our species. And ultimately our sexuality changes as well. I was once sexually attracted to 16 year old girls (when I was 16) - now in my 30s the idea of that is a sexual turn off. So clearly there is an element to our sexuality that is constantly adapting to where we are in life. Is that choice or is that inborn - I'm not sure. It's complicated. Anyways, sorry about the wall of text, just an interesting topic of debate that thankfully hasn't devolved into any putrid, sexist, racist or homophobic rants as of yet.

 

[Treeinthewoods]

I think OP means that homosexuality is a choice in that a person can choose to engage in their desires or not.

I think that is incorrect though, I think the attraction (which cannot be controlled) is what defines the sexuality of a person, not whether or not they act on it. A man who is attracted to men exclusively is a homosexual, if he never acts on his desires and remains a virgin until he dies he was still a homosexual, just not a sexually active homosexual.

Does that even make sense? I mean a person can choose to be sexually active or not but cannot control who they are attracted to...

 

[BoredAussieGamer]

Simple question:

When did you decide to be straight?

I didn't choose it, I just am.

 

[ATRAYA]

I wouldn't consider it offensive to consider any sexuality as a choice - I myself am asexual, and it technically is a choice no matter how any defensive members of any sexual-awareness group want to paint it. You're not born to love, especially a specific group; that's a conditional prerogative of humans that has become very twisted by society.

My asxuality is a choice. I could ALWAYS follow nature's course and find a female to mate with and produce offspring, though my preference to not wanting human companionship deters me from that. And that's all sexuality is: a deep preference. Obviously, nobody wakes up one day and says, "You know what? Forget the desired gender I previously wished to rub genitals with! I want to rub my genitals with the chiral sex for no reason at all!" But just because it's not an impulsive choice doesn't make it less of choice.

The "deep preference" I'm referring to is usually a culmination of life experiences that pushes an organism to a specific, optional desire ("love" and mating are always optional). It is a "compounding choice", if you will. Because the preference runs so deep as to fester in the subconscious (see: erotic dreams pandering to sexual preference), many people understandably assume that they were just "born with it" (as though having a differing lifestyle choice is somehow an affliction and they must defend it with that scientifically-inaccurate phrase), an error which has subsequently led to it being offensive to say a particular preference/orientation is a choice.

Somehow, in the aforementioned twisting of society, humanity has managed to make a synonym offensive.

The biggest problem with this erring - the whole "[insert sexuality] is not a choice!" idea - is that it restricts sexual freedom. People feel that once they decide they are homosexual/heterosexual/bisexual/pansexual/asexual, that it is set in stone because they were "born with it"; that it's their "destiny" or other such nonsense (humanity adores feeling unique, like they have something to fight for and that there is something they must accomplish). I, for one, know that, while there is a strong chance I will be asexual until death, there is always the possibly I may choose to be heterosexual again in the future. Or maybe switch to homosexuality. Or another choice. My possibilities are only limited by the number of sexual orientations available.

TL;DR: It's okay to change your mind, your sexuality is not set in stone, nor is it possible for the calling of a preference "a choice" to be considered offensive.

 

[Piorn]

Because it implies malice.
Imagine I'm a grumpy, conservative homophobe, and I feel offended by a homosexual being homosexual, and also say it's his choice.
With that, I would imply that that person is being homosexual just to offend me, because he could chose to be heterosexual as well and not piss me off.

You can't choose your sexuality, so being accused of "willingly insulting" a homophobe with your sexuality is unjustified and cruel.

 

[Evil Smurf]

I'll message you my response, I fear that I will elicit a thread more nasty then what you did otherwise.

 

[Angelous Wang]

The problem is that bisexuality can be a choice rather than a "born with", and it throws of peoples views of homosexuality.

I've know of quite a few men who were only attracted to women sexually but like to be on bottom end of anal sex with men just because of the different sexual pleasures of it.

So in reality they have chosen to be bisexual based on the fact they like to have occasional sex with men, but on an "born with" attraction level they are still completely heterosexual and don't find men attractive at all.

And of course homosexuality is not the same, homosexuals are born attracted to their same gender they did not make any choice about it.

But because of the fact some people can choose to have sex with a gender they are not attracted to it causes confusion and sexuality gets viewed as a choice, even though it is not.

 

[Kristian Fischer]

It's not offensive, just factually wrong. It's like saying that gravity is a "choice".

 

[Talvrae]

Simple because it's not a choice... I didnt choose to be attracted to other women, i just am

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Because you don't know how much of a choice it is, and regarding it as a choice puts the onus on the homosexual to justify their actions where they shouldn't have to because it's probably something that happens independantly of their conscious mind. You have to understand that some of the opposers of homosexuality need to see it as a choice because otherwise their "You're just doing it to piss off God and make people squeamish" argument doesn't work.

 

[camazotz]

denying your feelings for the same gender and denying your feelings for children are very different situations indeed

How so?

You feel what you feel. You can control ACTING on your feelings, but that does not change what you desire. The question could be what should be done about it? 13 year olds are choosing to have sex with EACH OTHER now.. they don't seem incapable of not making a decision about if they would sleep with an older person or not. How does society intend on reconciling the hypocrisy?

On the other hand,

Well first of all it isn't a choice. You can't just wake up today and say "You know what, I'm going to be attracted to that person."

The main reason, I think, is that it's often used to try and justify homophobia and condemn homosexuality as somehow being immoral.

I think it's quite like that.. because to be frank, I didn't really find myself attracted to ANYONE male OR female till I was about 14. I just didn't care or think of emotional or sexual things.. I wanted to play with video games or toys.

So yeah, I do believe you sort of wake up one day and realize what you are attracted to. I personally know people that were complete breeders and never once really thought of it until one day they found themselves in the mood to experiment because they were BORED and decided to switch teams because it was more exciting, I'm assuming because it was new. Just as I know people who used to be gay and are now straight for some reason... although I admit, like someone earlier mentioned, this seems to be a commonality amongst females, as all of the examples I mentioned are female.

Let's clear a few things up: first, pedophilia is actually shown to be a learned behavior in many cases; there is not a correlation between pedophilia and homosexuality, but there is a potential correlation between some victims later becoming victimizers. I was once involved with a woman who has a child at age 13 due to a 32 year old man who also left her on her own, skipped town, and later ended up in jail for other acts against minors. My wife was sexually abused from age 12-17 by a trusted person who escaped punishment because all related parties chose to protect him over her needs. She suffers to this day from deep emotional issues stemming from sexual abuse.

So if you want to argue that a 13 year old is of the right mind to consent to an adult then let's talk about the developmental process of the human mind, which isn't even complete until close to age 25. We can't even vote, or drink in most cases (in the states) until age 18 or 21 respectively....and yet someone thinks that at 13 it's okay to consent to sex with an adult? Only one party in that relationship understands the full impact of sexual realtions at that age, and it's not the kid.

Bottom line though: pedophilia is not related to homosexuality; it's something that is done by people with a problematic pathology, and could very well be a psychological disorder. At best one could argue that such people need proper medical attention and even long term care. At the very least those people need to understand that they are laboring under desires and impulses that of necessity turn them into predators, and that unless society changes dramatically sometime in the future, they had better keep those impulses under control.

I personally wish I could do great and permanent harm to the man who abused my wife. I wish I could have exacted such punishment on the person who armed my ex-girlfriend from long ago, for that matter. But I have a family to protect, and I can do all I can to keep them safe from sick people who can't comprehend that they are abusing others by virtue of their own mental problems.

To get to topic, I think that pedophiles in any context with homosexuality is a red herring. One can no more argue that heterosexuality is bad because of pedophiles, and there are a lot more of those out there than ther are homosexual child predators.

 

[camazotz]

Simple because it's not a choice... I didnt choose to be attracted to other women, i just am

This here. It's just "something that happens," and I get the feeling bi-sexuals (and those who don't realize they are bi-sexual and think it's a choice issue) don't realize this. First time I saw a nude woman in a magazine I had pilfered from the grocery store BAM! I was hooked.

 

[camazotz]

The problem is that bisexuality can be a choice rather than a "born with", and it throws of peoples views of homosexuality.

I've know of quite a few men who were only attracted to women sexually but like to be on bottom end of anal sex with men just because of the different sexual pleasures of it.

So in reality they have chosen to be bisexual based on the fact they like to have occasional sex with men, but on an "born with" attraction level they are still completely heterosexual and don't find men attractive at all.

And of course homosexuality is not the same, heterosexual are born attracted to their same gender.

But because of the fact some people can choose to have sex with a gender they are not attracted to it causes confusion and sexuality gets viewed as a choice, even though it is not.

Well you make a point...maybe....that it's possible for some people to have sex with the same gender and not be attracted to them (I suppose enough testosterone makes it possible?) however....since you know these guys, I have to ask: they like getting it from other men, but do they also deliver? Change positions, I mean? Because I can think of nothing that would kill my sexual mood more than seeing some guy's hairy ass...

 

[already in use]

Like its been said you cant just change what you like (except maybe through excessive conditioning).
Since most people are not 100% homo or heterosexual (its a cuddly warm human being in both cases) you could of course
try not to pursue one side of your sexuality which many people do conciously or subconciously
because its such a big deal in our current society (not so much in ancient greece for example).

 

[DaWaffledude]

Because, if it were a choice, then homophobes would find it very easy to shift any blame off of themselves.

"it's not our fault they CHOSE to be gay. If they don't like how we feel then they should just stop it."

The idea implies that gay people have evaluated the consequences of being gay in a homophobic society and are mostly fine with it.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Jeez, the dodgy science is out in force already.

We can't technically rule out the possibility that homosexuality may have a "biological" basis. What we can say is that people have been searching for such a thing for over 150 years now and have found precisely nothing to demonstrate that this might be the case. What little evidence there is is either deeply, deeply flawed or cannot be reliably repeated.

At this point, I think it's more offensive to assume that homosexuality is something so abnormal it requires a specific anatomical explanation, because no "heterosexual" has ever had desires, fantasies or feelings towards anyone of the same sex. Oh, wait, actually an awful lot of people have.

snip

To be honest, I kind of see what you're getting at.

I personally feel it can be very affirmative to say that homosexuality is a choice, not in the sense that the sexual attraction itself is a choice, but in the sense that choosing to live a life in accordance with desires, choosing not to compromise yourself for other people is a choice, and it's a choice worth making.

This is something I think we very much owe to the pride movement, because part of the ethos of pride is affirming that you aren't just a slave to something you know is wrong, that being different to other people does not devalue your existence. In the past, people often assumed that being gay (or even openly bi) would doom you to a life of loneliness and unhappiness followed by suicide or disease. That's not true any more, and I think there's something to be said for celebrating the choices we do have rather than, essentially, looking for ways to apologize for being what you are.

However, we also have to deal with a world in which some people still believe homosexuality can be "cured", and where some gay people are deeply, deeply unhappy with their sexuality, and right now there are some very manipulative people in the world who are making a lot of money out of offering those people treatments which simply don't work and which are generally highly abusive and horrific in what they actually end up doing.

Thus, it depends on how you phrase it. Simply saying "homosexuality is a choice" without clarifying what you mean might be read as insulting, but I think if you are willing to qualify what you're talking about it need not be.

Or to put it very very simply, there's a problem right now and the problem is that saying "homosexuality is a choice" generally entails an unspoken "..therefore, you should choose to be straight".

 

[TrulyBritish]

As for me, I'm asexual; so frankly, you're all weird.

LOL!!! How exactly is one "asexual?"
Do you just divide at will?!? Lol are you strictly monogamous in regards to loving yourself?

Sometimes I like to think of myself as "BUYsexual"

You BUY me something, I'll get real SEXUAL

No, it means I don't want sex, at all. I have no sexual attarction to anything. We do exist, but tend to be pretty invisible for the obvious reasons . A little group that will always pick cake over sex.

You're telling me there are people who will pick sex over cake? What madness is this?!
OT:You're right and wrong I suppose. Acting on your sexuality is indeed a choice, but actual being homosexual isn't, so you've merely changed the definition of homosexuality to something else. Technically, I guess it isn't offensive, albeit rather ignorant, to call it a choice, but that's rarely the context used, and it's often used as a way to demean or invalidate the LGBT community, as then obviously "it's gay peoples own fault if they're harassed, nothing's forcing them to be all homotastic".