I'd definitely agree that gaming culture in general is very homophobic. It's fairly amusing to me, since most of the gay friends I have are into games.
I won't mention what drew me to this thread, but I felt it would be worthwhile to contribute on something I do know about the subject, whose understanding I see as lacking here. That being the biological basis for homosexual behavior.
Just about every sort of mammal out there, from mice to dolphins exhibit homosexual behavior. In most species there are individuals who are distinctly homosexual, and those who exhibit the behavior on an opportunistic basis. To avoid a lengthy explanation, (which I'd be pleased to furnish on request) the homosexual individuals of our species who have submitted to testing have shown measurable differences in their brain chemistry and development.
The classical argument is one of preference vs. orientation. That is, that one side believes that being gay is a choice, while the other believes it's something you're born into. It's difficult, I feel, to support the idea of strictly preference when given the real facts on the physical and chemical differences shown by homosexual brains vs. heterosexual ones.
However it's my belief that the truth, as it usually does, lies somewhere between the black and white sides of the argument. That is, there are individuals whose predidlection is based on both biological and preferential reasons. This, I think is simply because there are those individuals who are less effected by their physiology than others, who do have choice in the matter.
At any rate, to claim that homosexuality is some unnatural plague of humanity that's only come to pass in recent times is to ignore the fact that it's been around as long as human history itself. Anyone who wishes to back those arguments up with religion or disbelief in the fact that humankind is biologically related to the rest of the living organisms on this planet is not fit to argue with me on any subject.
Sorry if what I've babbled about was already sorted out earlier, but 235 pages definitely qualifies as tl:dr for me.
Lole, I was writing up my treatise on homosexuals while the argument progressed.
As I mentioned, I have gay friends. While I'd expect words like fag, or dyke, or any other pointed term to strike a cord with them, they use gay to describe themselves. long story short, I don't think the word gay has any negative connotation to the gay person.
What confuses me is why does the word gay tend to imply male homosexuality more than female? Females use their own special term (which I think is ghastly) lesbian, to describe their sexual orientation.
Lesbian is just so...awkward. I don't know how else to put it, but gay is just a word that has evolved into the current generation's dictionary. Most of the time it isn't even referring to the meaning. "That's so gay!" Does not refer to actual homosexuality, but is just an expression of anger or annoyance. Thus making "gay," the word of choice.
Indeed. I understand where the term comes from and why it was used to describe gay women but I don't like how is makes a distinction between us and gay males. The gay community just sounds better then the lesbian and gay community.
Plus the people of Lesbos are pissed off about the term being used to describe groups other themselves. Which kind of makes sense since they are the true lesbians haha.
Heh, I think you're right on the money there Estel. There's just a lack of an elegant term for the subject. I know I've used the word gay as an expression of discontent. More amusing is that so have some of my gay friends.
My objection to the term Lesbian is due to its roots in the ancient Greek practice of pederasty. Not to mention how cumbersome the word itself is.
Over 11 pages since yesterday? Oh goodness...hahaha, that's awesome.
One note: Consider the possibility that within species that homosexual behavior is prevalent, that this homosexual behavior is there because it is actually an advantage to the populations in terms of stability and dynamics.
Zophia, there have been various intimations in the past few months (before you signed on) as to whether it would be appropriate to discuss other 'deviant'/'abnormal'/'alternative' sexualities. Were Asherlee here in full capacity, we would have had such a thread up and running quite a while ago.
I personally think that this forum in general is capable of holding a mature discussion, starting with definitions and going from there. Since behavior is my major area of interest career-wise, I have the background knowledge and therefore will be keeping a close eye on any such threads.
The first thing I would do would be very clear about what is meant by the term "fetish", as opposed to "araphilia", and how well-defined these terms really are (i.e. not very).
My objection to the term Lesbian is due to its roots in the ancient Greek practice of pederasty
How would you "object" to it? I mean to say that since the term has been so effectively removed from its roots (as the word gay has) that I wouldn't think this to be much of a consideration if at all.
However the more general point is that when homosexuality is referred to, most of the talk centers on the male side of things. A parallel observation is that talk of 'deviant sexuality' is disproportionately focused on males as opposed to females.
@rafael_marc22: First. Love as a feeling is never disgusting. The acts of it may be to some people, but the feeling itself - just no. Why do you find it disgusting anyway? It's not like you have to watch them do naughty stuff (and personally I think straights can be disgusting too, not in general, but it's possible). Why does it exist? Well it has been around forever, why would it suddenly disappear?
Zophia, there have been various intimations in the past few months (before you signed on) as to whether it would be appropriate to discuss other 'deviant'/'abnormal'/'alternative' sexualities. Were Asherlee here in full capacity, we would have had such a thread up and running quite a while ago.
Can we get that up and running soon? I tend to love studying the strange quirks of what people are into, and it has proven to be quite possible to have a discussion about it. I won't create one myself, because I don't think I would be able to write a decent - discussion starter.
Heh, I know~ Walls of text seems to be your specialty. I however, would do the opposite and have way too loose material provided... I'm not good at writing big, detailed things, but I tend to get my points understood most of the time. Maybe we should co-op?
you do not become but you accept a thought or general idea that you hear you find hey it's a free country but that is what grinds my gears when people use those words because it was made to mean we are a free people in a democratic government not a country that let's it's people do things they find moraly right it meant freedom of religon adn persecution of religon.
