I suppose it's not a mental disorder in the sense that it does not impair their ability to function in society, and it doesn’t bring physical harm to themselves or others.
But there’s definitely something not normal going on in their minds. I guess it goes back to the nature vs. nurture argument, are homosexuals born homosexuals or is it something that is learned?
Freud believed that human beings were all born bisexual, and you developed your sexual preference as a result of your experiences with parents and others. This theory has been highly disregarded, but many experts believe that homosexuality is the result of pathological family relationships at around the age of 5, or the result of a phobic response to the opposite sex early in life.
Other statistics have shown that homosexuals are much more likely to commit suicide, suffer from depression, develop eating disorders, among other mental problems.
But if you think about it, homosexuality can cause harm to the social structure, especially if your society’s values and norms don’t look kindly on it. Sex has a major influence on families (whether they realize it or not), and with two men or two women as the parental figures, it can have a profound affect on the child or children that grow up in that environment. In a way, homosexuals have formed their own counter-culture, which reflects negatively on society and disrupts it as well, since there is usually resistance to the counter-culture.
And it can also cause physical harm, since they have a higher chance of spreading venereal diseases. It can be argued that you can spread these diseases either way, but clearly the chances are greater with homosexuals.
Many people also say that it just isn’t natural, since it’s only a man and a woman that can create life. But others say that it’s just the same as heterosexual love, only with the same sex. You could look at it either way I suppose.
I’m not saying I agree, but these are the main arguments. I tend to agree with the people that say no, but others aren’t so sure. It’s definitely not a certainty in my mind, anyway.
LOL I am not even sure who that was directed at or what as a matter of fact ask all the w questions🙂 My point wasn't to mock you spelljammer its just to point out that hormones don't nec incite a change in sexual preference. Cuz if women had alot of extra testosterone they would be alot more aggressive and buying alot more razors and men would run rampant with gynocamostia due to extra estrogen.
So I don't think its so much a hormonal situation. Heck just think if popping a pill could solve this then worrying about childeren, estates and wills as well as spousal healthcare wouldn't really be there cuz pop a pill and then BAM "normal" just a thought there
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Intercourse is a natural act.End of story.
-AC
So, would you say that bestiality could be considered normal?
I know that’s a bit extreme, but how can you say something is just “natural”? Couldn’t one make the argument that only intercourse with the opposite sex is "natural", since it's the only way to procreate?
Don't confuse normal with natural.
Is bestiality normal? No. Natural? Yes. Because intercourse, no matter how grotesque or weird, is a natural act.
If you wanna argue procreation, fine. Doesn't disprove me. Homosexuality isn't unnatural, just unconventional if anything.
Originally posted by Great Vengeance
Yeah just disregard the little problem that if it were natural to be gay then every race would die out.
It is natural. It's just not primary or conventional. What's unnatural about two living beings of the same species having intercourse? Nothing.
-AC
Originally posted by BackFire
Where? In nature. Animals have been observed having sex with the same gender.
I honestly didn't know that.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Is bestiality normal? No. Natural? Yes. Because intercourse, no matter how grotesque or weird, is a natural act.-AC
Woah! Ok well I know where you stand now. To argue further would be futile... agree to disagree, for me at this point.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Don't confuse normal with natural.Is bestiality normal? No. Natural? Yes. Because intercourse, no matter how grotesque or weird, is a natural act.
If you wanna argue procreation, fine. Doesn't disprove me. Homosexuality isn't unnatural, just unconventional if anything.
It is natural. It's just not primary or conventional. What's unnatural about two living beings of the same species having intercourse? Nothing.
-AC
Your just clouding the meanings, fine believe what you like.. we arent in disagreement on this matter except for a trivial quarrel with the different interpretations of natural.
Originally posted by Great Vengeance
Your just clouding the meanings, fine believe what you like.. we arent in disagreement on this matter except for a trivial quarrel with the different interpretations of natural.
Interpretations? Natural: Created by or produced by nature.
What is intercourse? One of those? None? All?
In your defence, another definition is "Following the USUAL course of nature." In which case, homosexuality isn't unnatural, just unconventional.
-AC
Originally posted by Great Vengeance
Yeah just disregard the little problem that if it were natural to be gay then every race would die out.
Homosexuality IS natural. It being natural doesn't mean that everyone will be like that. Homosexuality isn't anything new, it's existed forever.
It's not a mental disorder. It's simply being attracted to people of your own gender. If that were a mental disorder, so would being heterosexual, as in either case, you don't and can't control who you're attracted to.
Nor are all gays/lesbians more feminine/masculine than straight people of their gender -- this is just a silly stereotype that simply isn't true. I'm a bisexual female and I don't act more masculine than the average female, nor do I act more feminine. I have many friends and know many other people who are bi or gay. They act just like a straight person of their gender does.
Anyway, this whole thought that it's a mental disorder, is quite sad and rather offensive, I'd say.
If you look at this from a psychologist’s point of view, there may be some cases where homosexuality can be considered a mental disorder (according to DSM and other abnormal psych manuals).
So, we can’t deny that homosexuality can be considered abnormal. Abnormal behavior is divided into two types, conceptual and practical.
Psychologists consider abnormal behavior from a conceptual perspective to mean that it simply differs from the societal norm. I don’t think anyone will deny this can be the case with homosexuals.
A practical perspective of a abnormal behavior is a bit more complex. This viewpoint focuses on the three clinical criterion for being diagnosed with a mental disorder, and they are discomfort, deviance, and dysfunctional.
Is homosexual behavior discomforting? It can be. Discomfort can be characterized as emotional or physical. Physical discomfort can probably be ruled out here, but emotions can definitely play a role. If homosexuality can lead to anxiety and depression, then there’s no reason to say that it’s not discomforting. If the feeling is very intense, exaggerated, and prolonged it can fit into this category.
Is homosexual behavior deviant? Certainly, since abnormal sexual behaviors can be considered deviant within a society, perhaps to the point of taboo. Normal is subjective, so in certain situations it can be considered deviant to be a homosexual.
Is homosexual behavior dysfunctional? It can be, if you look at it this way. We consider dysfunctional to be unable to fulfill specific roles we are expected to carry out. If being a homosexual can impair a person’s ability to play a specific role, you could argue that it can be considered dysfunctional.
So, in certain situations, homosexuals can be considered to have a mental disorder. But since this is not true with all homosexuals, then it's safe to say that homosexuality is not a mental disorder in itself. But this also goes to show that homosexuality can lead to other mental disorders. That’s one way to look at it. It's all about someone's point of view, I suppose. I just argue this because some of you seemed surprised that this is questionable, but there are other ways to look at it. Whether it be right or wrong.