Originally posted by PVS
vague anecdotal heresay aside, its very possible for a person who is bisexual to decide to not have sex with a particular gender, just as its very possible for a person to decide not to have sex at all.
And your point is ?
Who you have sex with does not actually determine your preference. You know that....
The reasons why you have sex with whoever is what actually determines your preference.....
Ex: If you have sex with men and women for money, you may be bisexual by orientation, but not by preference..not if you actually are only attracted to one gender
Nell, another example for you: For decades, Gay Men have married women, had children, and have been faithful to thier wives for the majority of thier life, until they give out and realize they are not straight.
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
until they give out and realize they are not straight.
I wouldn't call it a matter of giving out...or giving up or giving in, etc. I'd call it a matter of being unable to openly express their preference due to fear of rejection and persecution brought about by a society that forces people to be ashamed of themselves. All of the older men I know who married and had children really wanted children and consider it their greatest acheivment. Their marriage, despite loving their wives, was a result of settling for something when they felt they had no other options.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I wouldn't call it a matter of giving out...or giving up or giving in, etc. I'd call it a matter of being unable to openly express their preference due to fear of rejection and persecution brought about by a society that forces people to be ashamed of themselves. All of the older men I know who married and had children really wanted children and consider it their greatest acheivment. Their marriage, despite loving their wives, was a result of settling for something when they felt they had no other options.
Try convincing Nellinator that they weren't simply "confused", or that they somehow brought it upon themselves, despite thier efforts to live the straight lifestyle successfully
Originally posted by Nellinator
Wow logic. Shame on you.
im glad you agree. so long as you understand:
Originally posted by PVS
its very possible for a person who is bisexual [feels a sexual attraction to both men and women, as opposed to homosexual] to decide to not have sex [as opposed to being able to choose who they are attracted to.] with a particular gender, just as its very possible for a person to decide not to have sex at all.
Originally posted by PVS
im glad you agree. so long as you understand:
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Oh trueThe same way we already had to argue the definition of "choice" beforehand.
🙄
Originally posted by Nellinator
To be fair, finding a working definition that can be agreed upon is an important part of debating. If definitions are not clearly defined in the context, debates tend to end up messy as people misunderstand each other.
Not in this case. In this case, you seem to believe that deciding not to make the effort anymore (25 years into a marriage) is a lack of trying. I assume that is because you believe that gay people choose to be gay.
to choose is to consciously decide to do something.
to be conditioned is to have been molded to do something.
neither has anything to do with this topic.
the indirect implication is about the possibility that a childs hormonal developement can be a factor in which gender they prefer. that would be nature.
Originally posted by Nellinator
This case shows a biological factor to homosexuality, but conditioning can override biological and environmental factors, meaning that choice does have a role in the whole situation. I don't want to get into this, so if anyone wants to continue this do it in another thread.
conditioning is not whats taught, but what you take in. its a culmination of all your experiences. why would anyone choose to not be who they are?
Yes. I had a first crush. No. No. Yes.
I was referring to conditioning after the environmental conditioning you mentioned.
Your last question is the only real question that homosexuals need to answer and it is where choice comes into play. If people change it is not contradiction to who they are, it is not fighting who they are, it is simply changing who they are, for the better or for the worse.
why would someone want to choose to be something when its harmless nor inconvenient to be who they are? why? i dont understand.
the overall premise of your argument is that people should want to not be gay. if not, then why bother pondering choices? the only reason to suggest that people can/should choose to be straight is an implication that it is harmful. what else would beg that question?
Originally posted by PVS
why would someone want to choose to be something when its harmless nor inconvenient to be who they are? why? i dont understand.
the overall premise of your argument is that people should want to not be gay. if not, then why bother pondering choices? the only reason to suggest that people can/should choose to be straight is an implication that it is harmful. what else would beg that question?
Originally posted by Nellinator
You may assume right or wrong. It depends on what you mean by choose which is why defining the meanings of words to be used is an important precursor to debate.
That's not very vaild, as you have constantly decided the definitions of words to suit your own argument. If you need quotes of your own posts, I can do that too. You might find it more beneficial to ignore those posts and head right on to the arguments carried on by this more loving and accepting Nellinator than any found in your previous posts.