I Signed Up to Study Sexual Health. What I Got Was Gender Ideology, Fetishism, and Porn

submitted by IridescentAnacondastrictly dickly from quillette.com

all 53 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]julesburm1891 39 insightful - 4 fun39 insightful - 3 fun40 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

  1. This is a perfect example of why we should drop TQ. I don’t want to be associated with these actually insane ideas.

  2. Why is TQ so obsessed with BDSM? Hardcore violent bdsm comes up all the time with them. It’s almost like they’re mentally unbalanced or hate women or something.

  3. For all their scientific pretensions, many of my professors never really elevated their discourse above a children’s Gender Unicorn handout or I Am Jazz.

Of course they didn’t.

[–]Willpoll 32 insightful - 1 fun32 insightful - 0 fun33 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

What the actual fuck was that shit about BDSM???? That shit shouldn't be taught about in any classroom for fucks sake

[–]worried19 20 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 0 fun21 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

There are groups out there that actively work to teach BDSM to children and teenagers. Planned Parenthood is one of them.

https://web.archive.org/web/20130311055325/https://www.plannedparenthood.org/hudsonpeconic/files/Hudson%20Peconic/50_shades_registration.pdf

This was part of an expose some conservative group did on Planned Parenthood. Apparently, they found a lot more besides this. They were also promoting kink directly to underage teens. Unfortunately, it seems like this only got traction with anti-abortion groups. Planned Parenthood erased much of their BDSM content after this expose, but some of it is still there. This event was advertised to youth educators, especially middle school and high school teachers. Why in God's name would they hold an event like this with "a specific focus on teenagers?" It doesn't seem like any feminists called out Planned Parenthood for their actions in this case. This was back in 2014, but I can only find conservative sites talking about it, no feminist ones.

[–]Shadow_Lurker 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

What I don't understand is why the need to teach about fucking BDSM on schools, it makes no sense. Do people get murdered because they like to engage on it or something?

Where's the emergency?

[–]worried19 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think it's just part and parcel of their overall ideology. They need kids to accept it before they develop critical thinking skills.

After all, in some areas, SWERFs are considered just as bad as TERFs.

[–]ChodeSandwichtender and moist 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It seems like caving and coddling to me. Like "hey, we know you can't be bothered to keep your kids off porn, and we can't talk to them about it directly because religious sex-is-evil fundies and secular ""sex positive"" fundies will gang up on us from different sides, so here's a half-assed course on how to safely choke someone out."

[–]GConly 28 insightful - 1 fun28 insightful - 0 fun29 insightful - 1 fun -  (36 children)

God that was depressing. The observation that facts are being booted to the kerb is pretty standard in a lot of social "sciences" right now, because they figured out about 20 years ago the science just was not supporting a lot of their bullshit.

When it came to pedophilia, here’s where professors and students landed: Pedophilia is an inborn and, for clinical pedophiles, unchangeable sexual orientation. They did reject pedophilia as a legitimate sexual choice—but not, as one might hope, through thoughtful application of moral principles to sexual behavior. Rather, they simply declared that minors are by definition unable to give consent.

It's not a sexual orientation, it's a paraphilia. Basically a kind of sexual obsession, it's not at all in the same ballpark as being gay.

Research into pedophiles shows they have lower IQs and a host of low level deficits in other mental functions. Head injuries are pretty common in their life history.

The results showed that the pedophilic patients reported more head injuries before age 13 than did the nonpedophilic patients

This fact is also true for a lot of criminals. Even minor injuries can cause subtle long term changes in behaviour.

Basically they just aren't right in the head.

You can't make someone gay by bumping their head.

[–]Ladis_Wascheharuum 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They did reject pedophilia as a legitimate sexual choice—but not, as one might hope, through thoughtful application of moral principles to sexual behavior. Rather, they simply declared that minors are by definition unable to give consent.

I don't see the objection here? What "moral principles of sexual behavior" are we talking about, other than informed consent? The fact that it grosses out or makes uncomfortable someone who is not involved, or arguments from "nature" or "social norms", are not valid objections in my opinion.

The only standard that makes sense is, "Are all participants willing, aware of the risks, and not being coerced nor defrauded." Actually, I'd say that goes for any human interaction, sexual or not.

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (34 children)

You can't make someone gay by bumping their head.

Not literally no but I fully believe homosexuality can come from trauma. This has been my life experience. I was not "born gay" (No one is, and saying so is ridiculous as claiming someone was "born kinky" or "born trans") and I don't think that my fucked up childhood & too early exposure to weird sexual stuff online was a coincidence in the fact that I ended up homosexual.

And it makes me mad knowing that if I wasn't treated like shit and exposed to fucked up fetish shit I probably would've turned out healthy.

[–]Shadow_Lurker 20 insightful - 2 fun20 insightful - 1 fun21 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

I was not "born gay" (No one is, and saying so is ridiculous as claiming someone was "born kinky" or "born trans")

Or born straight.

Say what you will about radical feminists like Julie Bindel, but she got it spot on when she said that most efforts related to finding a biological basis of homossexuality were accompanied by an eugenic lust for wiping out gay people before birth.

Homosexuality doesn't have to be biological to be a legitimate expression of human sexuality and affection, and the assumption of the contrary is brimming with homophobia.

And it makes me mad knowing that if I wasn't treated like shit and exposed to fucked up fetish shit I probably would've turned out healthy.

Oh my, the implications!

I don't know most gay man on this sub, but I haven't been exposed to any fucked up shit in my predominantly tradicional catholic upbringing.

But that's just me, I guess..

[–]GConly 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

that most efforts related to finding a biological basis of homossexuality were accompanied by an eugenic lust for wiping out gay people before birth.

It seems to be caused by prenatal hormone exposure. Science has been turning out lesbian guinea pigs and monkeys for decades by farting about with testosterone and embryos.

Sexual orientation being innate has been a large part of the argument for making the religious nuts back off for years.

[–]Shadow_Lurker 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sexual orientation being innate has been a large part of the argument for making the religious nuts back off for years.

Religious homophobes don't give a shit if homossexuality is inate or not, as their beliefs are based on faith and social control more than anything.

Case in point: modern gay conversion therapy is most of the time a 'let's teach the gays how to cosplay as straight' kind of affair and not 'let's teach the gays how to feel horny for woman'. Even they know it's not possible to do this kind of shit.

The 'gay is inate' is more of a secular argument if anything.

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Well yeah, I brought up that point too. No idea why the pro gay crowd are in such a rush to prove that being gay is something you have from birth, because that's exactly how we end up with selective abortions and wacky "treatments" on babies. Although, unlike intersex kids, people actually see homosexuals as good, so maybe that won't happen. Maybe they'll abort the straight kids instead lol.

a legitimate expression of human sexuality and affection

What do you mean by legitimate?

I haven't been exposed to any fucked up shit in my predominantly tradicional catholic upbringing

lol I was raised Catholic and still was. Doesn't matter how much Jesus is pushed on you if you have unlimited internet access + are friends with bad influences

[–]Shadow_Lurker 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What do you mean by legitimate?

That homossexuality is a natural extension of human sexuality and affectivity in the same way heterossexuality is. It doesn't need to be 'explained' at all, it can just exist like it aways had.

lol I was raised Catholic and still was. Doesn't matter how much Jesus is pushed on you if you have unlimited internet access + are friends with bad influences

Thank god I only had internet access after I was 14 lol

[–]reluctant_commenter 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

And it makes me mad knowing that if I wasn't treated like shit and exposed to fucked up fetish shit I probably would've turned out healthy.

I guess I'm curious-- how do you explain all the homosexual and bisexual people who are that way but never had any childhood trauma or exposure to fetishes at a young age? Are they unhealthy? And if so, why?

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

The same way that some people develop mental illnesses seemingly out of nowhere? Just because X can be caused by trauma doesn't mean X can ONLY be caused by trauma.

Is it unhealthy? It's hard to say. A man can have no history of trauma and still end up as one who abuses others. And considering the percentage of homosexuals I've met who have toxic or downright abusive behavior towards others I think it's still often unhealthy even if they haven't suffered trauma. Just because they don't think it's traumatic to THEMSELVES doesn't mean they're not harming others, either. I'm sure all the men who get off on abusing feminine males and who have harassed me LOVE being gay.

[–]reluctant_commenter 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The same way that some people develop mental illnesses seemingly out of nowhere?

Or the same way that some people develop a sweet tooth seemingly out of nowhere?

And considering the percentage of homosexuals I've met who have toxic or downright abusive behavior towards others I think it's still often unhealthy even if they haven't suffered trauma.

How do you know that this abusive behavior is due to their homosexuality, though? Correlation is not causation. I have met many narcissistic, abusive straight people, but I don't assume their heterosexuality is the cause of their narcissism. (A TRA would tell you differently, of course. But I don't think homosexuality is a positive thing-- or a negative thing.)

I'm sure all the men who get off on abusing feminine males and who have harassed me LOVE being gay.

That is messed up, I'm sorry to hear that's happened to you. Were they like catcallers on the street or what?

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

Lol being homosexual isn't like "A sweet tooth." Being homosexual isn't a flavor preference. Your flavor tastes can and do change over time but this sub will shit itself if you dare imply sexuality can ever change, not even that it is guaranteed.

Also liking sweet foods doesn't cause irreparable sexual damage, severe mental distress and, if I acted on my desires, incurable disease and possibly death. So y'know. Not comparable.

How do you know that this abusive behavior is due to their homosexuality, though? Correlation is not causation. I have met many narcissistic, abusive straight people, but I don't assume their heterosexuality is the cause of their narcissism. (A TRA would tell you differently, of course. But I don't think homosexuality is a positive thing-- or a negative thing.)

Because while abusive straight guys seem to be a vocal minority, I have yet to meet another homosexual male who I can actually confirm is not abusive. Even random casual encounters on forums like these I can't be sure and often, even in a totally nonsexual, political only discussion, gay guys tend to leave "red flags" about abusive behavior.

And for the record I do count myself in this group. I think all homosexual males are inherently sexually unhealthy in one way or another. A lot of them abuse others but a lot of them are also masochistic or otherwise just weird. I think a lot of males are sexually unhealthy in general (and I think it's very rare, almost impossible, for males to feel love) but it seems to be way more common with homosexuality in the mix.

Were they like catcallers on the street or what?

Some of them. There have been catcallers on the street (Although some of those are straight. I don't exactly "pass" as male. Sometimes it's clear they think I'm female) who can do anything from mistake me for a prostitute to follow me around an entire town. Sometimes it's guys on social media sending me sexually explicit messages detailing about how they'd like to rape me, and then when I tell them to fuck off they go around telling everyone else that I'm "abusive" and mean and try to humiliate me. Sometimes it's random messages online with NO sexual or adult context behind it (case in point, last night I was talking to friends on Discord and some guy messages me out of the blue with a very explicit question I won't repeat) but even if it is a NSFW discussion I tend to hide my sexuality. Doesn't matter, guys still harass me. If it's a group discussion and people know I'm a feminine guy? Then they will often make PUBLIC "jokes" about raping me or sexually degrading acts because they see me as a "femboy" and thus that apparently means I'm supposed to inherently like this shit.

And that's not even getting into my real life "closer" encounters with men, which I won't say much about, but it is horrible.

I am being completely honest when I say no man shows sexual interest in me and sees me as a person at the same time. It just doesn't happen. Combine that with not feeling any love for men (ever) and not being happy with homosexuality and well, maybe you can start to see why I don't see this as something "beautiful" to be proud of & I just think it's a disorder and want it gone.

[–]reluctant_commenter 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts, it's making me think more about all of this. Now, for those comments...

liking sweet foods doesn't cause irreparable sexual damage, severe mental distress and, if I acted on my desires, incurable disease and possibly death. So y'know. Not comparable.

What evidence is there that homosexuality alone causes

  • irreparable sexual damage

  • severe mental distress

  • incurable diseases

  • death

on its own? Are you referring to the sexually transmitted diseases that one may get through having sex...? Because heterosexuals get those too. And what "irreparable sexual damage" is caused merely by the fact of being homosexual?

But while abusive straight guys seem to be a vocal minority

HAH! That's a hilarious idea. Maybe in your experience?? But, to get to some non-anecdotal evidence-- if you want to compare how abusive straight men are to homosexual men, this 2010s study of intimate partner violence in the U.S. found that

  • * Lifetime prevalence of undergoing rape, physical violence or stalking from an intimate partner: * 35% of heterosexual women (straight male perpetrator), vs. 26% of homosexual men (non-straight male perpetrator)
  • * Lifetime prevalence of severe physical violence by a partner: * 23.6% of heterosexual women, vs. 16.4% of homosexual men
  • * Lifetime prevalence of any sort of sexual violence (excluding rape), by any perpetrator: * 43.3% of heterosexual women, vs. 40.2% of homosexual men

I hate to break it to you but, at least here in the U.S., straight men abuse their partners at least as much as, or more than, homosexual men abuse their partners. (Perhaps cultural differences may make a difference?)

Link to the survey results, themselves: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc_nisvs_digest_final-a.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwj90cyE2-XsAhXkPn0KHXCdDcIQFjABegQIJRAC&usg=AOvVaw1H5DaIhlsf6S8yeSp25QkA&cshid=1604383672330

Link to a website about the survey: https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/NACJD/studies/34305

To be honest, though-- I agree with you, I don't really believe that homosexuality is a "beautiful" thing. I think it just is, neither negative or positive; but I can see why you feel so negatively about it. Male sexual objectification feels extremely shitty and I'm so sorry you have had to endure so much of it, dude. It sounds like you have to deal with the kind of sexual objectification women regularly get from straight males, as well as any harassment related to being intersex.

being completely honest when I say no man shows sexual interest in me and sees me as a person at the same time.

And to be completely honest myself, that has also been my experience, unfortunately :/ just from straight men. But that doesn't mean kind, thoughtful people aren't out there. I hope you're able to meet some of them.

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

No, I'm not (just) referring to STDs, although you should know that gay men are far more likely to contract STDs than any other group. This is not just because anal sex is far more risky, it's because gay men generally care less about safety & some of them even DELIBERATELY spread or seek out STDs. (Is that not enough of a warning sign that homosexuality may be linked to not being of healthy mind?)

But "irreparable sexual damage" doesn't just refer to disease, it also refers to: - serious anal trauma - other sexual trauma such as wounds from sadomascohism, something that is common in gay men - emotional/mental damage as a result of having a fucked up sexuality, such as the fact that I believe mine was "ruined" due to too early exposure to sex and unhealthy practices. We know this is a thing because males who regularly consume porn often suffer from erectile dysfunction and very unhealthy beliefs about sex/interest in sex.

My entire experience as a homosexual male tells me enough - loving gay men who care about others, at least, those who care about guys like me (feminine males/people who are very visibly "different") either don't exist or are a very small minority. The only people who have seemed to have any romantic interest in me are women; which unfortunately I cannot reciporate. Men however have no interest in my feelings, my wellbeing, or "loving" me, they just want to use my body, and most of the time this involves very violent excuses for "sex" and things like "domination" and emotional control. Not to mention I can literally feel that my sexuality is "broken," I can feel there's still a part of me that has heterosexual desires but it's like it is "blocked." I can't explain it in words very well but it's similar to that sinking feeling you get when deep down you know your injury is worse than you first thought or that an illness is getting worse. I know it's not intentional, it's not just that "some people randomly turn out gay," this is a problem with my brain as much as other neurological and mental issues. Otherwise I wouldn't feel conflicted. I am not influenced by "society" and I have never lived in an "anti gay" place, I have been bombarded with pro-gay propaganda since I was a child. The conflict I feel isn't "internalized homophobia" or other made up crap like that, it is literally that I can still feel that I'm supposed to be heterosexual, and being with guys is not good for me. If my homosexuality was "intentional", I was "born with it" etc, then surely I would fully love and be attracted to guys and not feel hurt & confused, right?

I hate to break it to you but, at least here in the U.S., straight men abuse their partners at least as much as, or more than, homosexual men abuse their partners.

Sorry but I don't trust any study, especially from the US, with homosexual statistics considering that Western culture has painted homosexuality as untouchable & "protected." People are not doing the necessary studies in fear of being "homophobic", so I can't trust any data. They won't even do proper resresearch into the cause, prevention, or even "treatment" for homosexuality because people have deemed it immoral.

Also isn't this self reported? Which are stats you can rarely trust.

I trust my lived experience way more than I trust a study from a country that refuses to acknowledge science & facts because they are "bigoted." I don't care what the study says, if what I can observe firsthand shows the opposite. I have known plenty of healthy straight couples, I have never known a healthy gay couple. Likewise I have never had a woman show interest in me by expressing she wants to physically or emotionally abuse me, but men have ONLY showed "interest" that way. I trust women over men, I do not trust gay men, and propaganda from a pro-gay culture will not sway me.

I don't want to meet "kind and thoughtful" gay men. I still believe that the only thing close to "good" ones are people like me who are self aware, but still not healthy. I don't believe they can be healthy, but it doesn't matter. I am not interested in dating men and I find gay men very unattractive, even if most of them weren't inherently abusive, the cult-like beliefs, stupid "culture", obnoxious fake accents and generally bizarre beliefs are a huge turn off. If I was FORCED to date a guy I would much rather date a bi guy, or even a straight one (obviously the latter is morally questionable but... so would be hypothetically forcing me to date a guy)

[–]GConly 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (20 children)

. I was not "born gay" (No one is, and saying so is ridiculous as claiming someone was "born kinky"

You can produce gay animals by messing about with their prenatal hormones. You can spot sex abnormalities in homosexuals with a brain scan too.

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (16 children)

You can spot sex abnormalities in homosexuals with a brain scan too.

So is this you finally admitting it's a disorder/abnormality or are you going to now backtrack & bullshit your way back to "N-NO GAY IS PERFECT, IT'S BETTER THAN STRAIGHT, IT'S INTENDED!" like people on this sub always do?

I've been saying it's a disorder for years. I think it's a brain abnormality, absolutely! Because I don't think it's a coincidence I have other neurological issues. But until proven otherwise I don't think it's something you're inherently born with. You can be born with brain damage but also get it later in life. It's not exclusive. Plus the "gay gene" has been heavily debunked.

I was not miraculously given the "gift" of homosexuality by God when I was concieved. If I was "predestined" to be gay before I was born, it was likely some other factor, like brain damage in the womb or at birth, that caused me to be that way.

I might get yelled at for saying this but this is what I believe. It is the only logical explanation to me.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Abnormal is not inherently a value judgment. It just means sufficiently statistically different from an identifiable majority.

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

That's also correct. But again, people on this sub usually shit their rainbow/Labrys patterned adult diapers when you say the word "abnormal" because they somehow get it conflated with "immoral."

And while I do believe homosexuality is negative, I mean it in a health sense, not a moral one. It's not immoral for me to be depressed, for example, but depression is bad because it severely, negatively impacts my life.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Idk I find the people in here infinitely more reasonable and realistic when it comes to discussions about the realities of homosexuality and bisexuality. Which is why we’re not trying to tear down the fabric of society to cater to our every whim or acting like society shouldn’t pretend that the vast majority of people are straight.

I hope you find whatever you need to treat your depression though.

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That has not been my experience. Usually I just see people denying science and reality (when it suits them, of course. Science is only valid when it invalidates TRA arguments, otherwise it's "homophobic" lol) and screeching "homophobia" at anything from me saying "Hey I'm not having a good time being gay" to a bi person calling themself gay once.

[–]deliciousdogfoodmy name isnt a puppyplay reference i swear 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

people on this sub usually shit their rainbow/Labrys patterned adult diapers when you say the word "abnormal" because they somehow get it conflated with "immoral."

From what I've seen of the almost always argumentative conversations you have on here, people tend to attack you more because you often conflate your personal traumatic experiences with homosexuality itself, rather than the corrosive social climate that surrounds it. It's always a very defeatist and negative tone from you, with all the tact of a brick through a window.

The ideal mean of reddit's overly sanitized policed speech and something like /pol/'s complete lack of any filter whatsoever is the kind of empathy and decency one would hope to see in day to day interactions. I.E not consistently phrasing your arguments in a way that shadows a religious fundamentalist calling us all freaks.

You're not the only one here who has been abused on account of your sexuality. If you want people to be more respectful in their responses to you, I'd consider being more respectful in the way you frame your talking points. Otherwise, you're probably just going to get kneejerk reactions from people who hear the voices of people who have attacked them in the past in your words.

A little less generalizing would probably help, too. That's a bad habit of yours, and it's personally turned me off of wanting to engage in conversation with you several times because it's often too big a roadblock to bother overcoming in a conversation with someone online.

It's all up to you, though; you can always continue as you have, no one is stopping you. But you're probably not going to convince anyone when you always come off as contrarian and provocative - a successful discourse requires more than the courage to bring up polarizing topics.

Got nothing on the biphobia though, that puzzles me just as much and seems to be another kneejerk reaction.

[–]Shadow_Lurker 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

NO GAY IS PERFECT, IT'S BETTER THAN STRAIGHT, IT'S INTENDED!" like people on this sub always do?

Never saw this, but eh...

Plus the "gay gene" has been heavily debunked.

Because the idea of a single gene that indicates homossexuality is something only people illiterate on genetics thinks exist. Even simple things like patellar reflexes have multiple genes linked into them, not just a single one.

So it might be the case that homossexuality is dictated by millions genes and not a single one, but who knows? Genetics are complicated and most discussions on the subject are superficial.

like brain damage in the womb or at birth, that caused me to be that way.

What you classify as "brain damage"? Because I don't think it means what you think it means.

Im medicine, "brain damage" is used most of the time to refer to damage caused by trauma, not emotional trauma, but physical trauma like bumps, direct impacts to the head or even degenerative deseases.

Now, brain development issues are on a whole other level and even them have their set of interesting nuances, for instance, let's pick autism for a moment: high functioning autists have been known for having some of the highest IQ scores and to grow to be great inventors and scientists that changed the history of humanity. Do people consider them to be 'damaged' in any way? No, they don't.

In the end of the day what constitutes a disorder or not can be very subjective, unfortunately.

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Do people consider them to be 'damaged' in any way? No, they don't.

Uh... yes they do. The social and sensory issues of autism (and related disorders) can be debilitating to live with, depending on severity. They're also not all geniuses. I think it's naive and disrespectful to treat autism like a "superpower" when I've heard countless autistic people wish they were normal & didn't have to deal with it. Source: Grew up in some kind of special ed school, knew a lot of autistic kids. And surprise, I am no "super genius" either. I'm just dumb.

You could argue that almost any disorder or illness has a silver lining. "Depressed people often try to make others laugh," "Cancer patients are inspiring and brave", etc. This does not mean they are not disorders, or that they are good things.

I think you might be derailing here. It does not matter HOW I was neurologically damaged, what matters is that I am. And that is why I believe I'm homosexual, among other things. I have no reason to believe homosexuality is genetic, and honestly, although I'm far from an optimist I'd rather believe that this is damage I have a chance to recover from, than something that was "destined" for me since before I was born. I don't feel like homosexuality is "part of me" like my ethnicity, hair color, body type, or anything else, and I don't want it to be. I cannot see it as anything other than an aberration that should not be there. It negatively impacts my quality of life and I genuinely believe I will never be happy for as long as it stays. I simply cannot believe it is "as nature intended" or a gift from a higher power.

[–]Shadow_Lurker 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Uh... yes they do.

I never saw anyone call Einstein or Newton 'damaged' in any way, but again, this might be just me...

The social and sensory issues of autism (and related disorders) can be debilitating to live with, depending on severity. They're also not all geniuses. I think it's naive and disrespectful to treat autism like a "superpower" when I've heard countless autistic people wish they were normal & didn't have to deal with it. Source: Grew up in some kind of special ed school, knew a lot of autistic kids. And surprise, I am no "super genius" either. I'm just dumb.

That's why I took pains to differentiate high funcioning autists from low funcioning autists, as they aren't the same. Most people when speaking about the subject tend to only talk about the second and not the first, interestingly enough.

I have no reason to believe homosexuality is genetic

This is not a matter of subjectivity.

I'm far from an optimist I'd rather believe that this is damage I have a chance to recover from, than something that was "destined" for me since before I was born. I simply cannot believe it is "as nature intended" or a gift from a higher power.

This cope won't help you with anything.

Want some advice? Maybe the problem is not with homossexuality itself, but with you. If you don't give more value to the life you have right now, then you will still suffer, homossexual or not.

This is the same thought process most 'eggs' have: "if I was the opposite sex my life would be so much easier, I would be so much popular and so on, so on.

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Because it's all a matter of perspective. Historical figures are glamorized and often we never know the truth about them.

Yeah but then you get to a point where, if they truly have no negative symptoms, are they really autistic or just smart?

This is not a matter of subjectivity.

Yes it is. It's literally unproven

Want some advice? Maybe the problem is not with homossexuality itself, but with you. If you don't give more value to the life you have right now, then you will still suffer, homossexual or not.

No, the problem is homosexuality. I'd like myself just fine if I was able to have a normal sexual/romantic relationship and not have to hate myself because I'm turned on by the people who hate me and want to harm me/ being in an abusive/rapey relationship. I DID like myself just fine back when I was/believed I was straight. Even though I was treated like shit by others and told I was inherently bad, I still was happy until homosexuality kicked in.

This is the same thought process most 'eggs' have: "if I was the opposite sex my life would be so much easier, I would be so much popular and so on, so on.

Irrelevant and not comparable. Sex cannot be changed and is very physical. Orientation isn't. I was born male, no, I was male before I was even born, yet I did not become homosexual until many years after I was born.

It's more like saying "If I wasn't depressed my life would be easier" or "If I didn't have neurological issues that made me emotionally volatile, people would like me more." Both of which aren't untrue, anyway.

I don't think my line of thinking is the problem. Why wouldn't I be unhappy with the fact that I'm not attracted to people who would treat me decently/as an equal (women) and that I exclusively have an involuntary, unwanted, extremely stressful sexual attraction to dangerous sex acts with the people who don't even see me as human? The answer is not just to "love myself for being broken and accept that I'm destined to be some guy's sex object." That's not living. And unless you're also going to give me a lecture about how great being depressed is and how I need to stop trying to recover, and just embrace being a shut in and never cleaning the house, then I think you need to question your point there.

[–]Shadow_Lurker 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yes it is. It's literally unproven

No it's not. "Unproven" is not the same as "proven negative".

There is a difference.

No, the problem is homosexuality. I'd like myself just fine if I was able to have a normal sexual/romantic relationship and not have to hate myself because I'm turned on by the people who hate me and want to harm me/ being in an abusive/rapey relationship.

No, it's you and specifically your low self-steem.

You as an independent human being have the capability of saying no to any sexual enconter. If you feel a sexual partner doesn't respect you as a person, even if you are attracted to them, there's still the option of not letting them fuck you.

Spoiler: if you don't impose some self-respect people, men and woman alike, won't respect you. I wish this wasn't the case, but we live in a world with a lot of shitty people.

Irrelevant and not comparable. Sex cannot be changed and is very physical. Orientation isn't.

If sexual orientation can be changed then why aren't you straight yet?

I was male before I was even born, yet I did not become homosexual until many years after I was born.

That's how sexuality works in general: gay, straight or bissexual.

Why wouldn't I be unhappy with the fact that I'm not attracted to people who would treat me decently/as an equal (women

You already presume much.

If you were straight you would learn that they also haven't it easy when the subject is dating. You would also probably be the type of person that complains about how women only want you because fo money, status or some shit. Nothing would change.

Women can be as cruel as men, you just don't seem to know it yet.

The answer is not just to "love myself for being broken and accept that I'm destined to be some guy's sex object."

I never said it was.

It might be cruel what I'm going to tell you, but it's necessary: you are only a "sexual object" because you allow this to be the case. As I said before, you have the capability to say no, to refuse to be turned into an sex object.

You are using homossexuality as an excuse for your own lack of willpower and low standards.

Like I said before: the problem is you

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Omfg this is insane.

"Being gay is genetic!!!"

"No it's not. That's never been proven."

"W-well that's not the same as being DISPROVEN!"

So... are you saying that, despite there's no evidence supporting it (and quite a lot of evidence against it), that we're supposed to believe it's true until definitively proven otherwise?

If that's so, why am I not allowed to believe that homosexuality is a disorder? That's never been disproven either.

No, it's you and specifically your low self-steem.

It has nothing to do with self esteem, other than that homosexuality contributed to low self esteem when I previously didn't have it.

You as an independent human being have the capability of saying no to any sexual enconter. If you feel a sexual partner doesn't respect you as a person, even if you are attracted to them, there's still the option of not letting them fuck you.

Yes and? That doesn't stop them from trying. That doesn't stop the influx of guys asking me to participate in degrading sexual acts, or the mere fact that there is no male interested in me who will NOT ask me do these things so I cannot have any healthy relationship.

If sexual orientation can be changed then why aren't you straight yet?

Mental illness can be recovered from, but I have not rid of my depression yet.

Just because sexuality can change doesn't mean it's a choice, just as how depression can be recovered from does not mean it's as simple as "choosing to be happy." If I what I believe is true; that homosexuality in me was caused by neurological issues and/or trauma, it could take YEARS to fix. If it's trauma based, that stuff is hard to get over, especially without help. And considering no one currently offers help for sexuality it means change is very difficult.

But I have no reason to believe it's impossible for me to get better. If I was "definitively, intentionally gay" and it could never be changed, why do I have straight urges inside (even if I am not aroused by them) and like the idea of being able to have a female partner?

That's how sexuality works in general: gay, straight or bissexual.

So which is it, "sexuality can never be changed" or "Nobody is born that way and we gain it later in life due to experiences"

Because those statements contradict each other.

If you were straight you would learn that they also haven't it easy when the subject is dating. You would also probably be the type of person that complains about how women only want you because fo money, status or some shit. Nothing would change.

Lol... no I wouldn't.

Firstly there is a big difference between being upset that the only people who are into you want to abuse and degrade you, and being pissed that people just want you for money. I'd rather be robbed than be sexually mistreated, they're not comparbale.

Secondly I have no money and status, and I don't think I ever will, so why would I ever complain about that? Plus the women who have been interested in me in the past seemed nice and normal. I have never had that experience with a man.

you are only a "sexual object" because you allow this to be the case.

Oh so victim blaming. It's my fault for men approaching me with "Hey bitch boy let me rape you" and no shred of love, because...? What? How can I fix anything? I can't simply magically choose to attract the mythical "good guys." I don't believe they exist but even if they did, I cannot use mind control. I cant magically make the abusive guys disinterested in my sexually and make the "good ones" like me.

Guess what, idiot. I say no ALL THE TIME. I don't consent to sex with abusive men. Unfortunately I have still had sex with guys Im not attracted to but I have NEVER consented to an abuser or a guy who treats me that bad. But that doesn't stop them from showing interest, and like I said, THERE HAVE BEEN ZERO GUYS INTERESTED IN ME WHO WERE DECENT. That is BEYOND my control.

[–]GConly 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

is this you finally admitting it's a disorder/abnormality or are you going to now backtrack & bullshit your way back to "N-NO GAY IS PERFECT, IT'S BETTER THAN STRAIGHT, IT'S INTENDED

Stop being hysterical. The difference is purely down to being intermediate between what's normal for the sexes.

It's not damage. It's not even abnormal for a human, just not normal for a human of that sex.

Also has sod all to do with genes, so not sure why you went all 'gay gene' on us.

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It is damage lol. Seriously, if you had to live my life you wouldn't still hold the opinion that it's benign. It's pretty fucking obvious that in both myself and others, it's a clear sign of neurological/sexual issues & most homosexuals are far from healthy, but nobody will see it that way because they're too hung up on their bullshit "love is love, rainbows and flamboyancy, I was born this way reeee" religion.

And I'm not the one being hysterical considering I don't believe in science-denying crap about homosexuality being some totally intentional good thing that some of us were "blessed" with.

[–]kwallio 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

fmri studies are not very reproducible and imo not really scientific.

https://www.studyfinds.org/scientists-admit-controversial-conflict-that-casts-doubt-on-studies-using-fmri-brain-scans/ They seem to be really great at confirming the investigators biases, tho, which is why they are so popular I guess.

[–]GConly 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Well for a start read what you post.

The MRI studies show structural differences in gay brains. Your article was about not about MRI studies looking at structure, but activity.

The article:

Research scientists often use functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) to measure the brain activity of individuals as they perform tasks.

They say that fMRI studies are great for identifying the general brain structures involved when people are performing an activity

Not even vaguely a debunk of MRI studies looking at brain structures.

You do know MRIs are used routinely in medicine to locate tumors etc?

[–]kwallio 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It would help me believe you if you didn't make it sound like you don't know the difference between MRI and fMRI. I know what an MRI is, I've had one. People really really want fMRI to be a thing, but the field has really not gotten to the point where reproducibility is a thing that happens. I, for one, don't believe fMRI studies and I don't think anyone else should either. They are very good at proving peoples biases are totally real tho!

[–]JulienMayfair 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This is the logical conclusion of Queer Theory wherein any and all norms for sexual behavior are the enemy.

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

His client had instructed him, as the dom recounted it, “I want you to bind me and then beat me until I scream. And no matter how much I scream or beg you to stop, I want you to keep beating me.” The dom did as he was told, continuing the beatings through the customer’s begging and pleading, until the client went totally limp and silent, seeming to dissociate. At this point, the dom unbound the man, who then began to weep uncontrollably in the dom’s arms.

As someone who has regrettably had too much experience with "kink" I will tell you this is not only uncommon, this is actually pretty tame. Plenty of "doms" won't hold someone in their arms afterwards. Plenty of them don't wait for you to ask to be beaten, degraded, humiliated, etc, they will do so anyway because they swear that being "dominant" (read: abusive asshole) is their core identity, and you have to like it, because you're a woman/feminine male/bitch boy/whatever the fuck.

I know the BDSM "community" likes to constantly scream "It's always consensual therefore it's okay, and if it's not consensual it's not REAL BDSM!" but the truth is, a large chunk of it is NOT consensual, or is only "consensual" in the way that the consent is coerced or pressured until the "submissive" says yes. ("You're boring if you don't let me do this, please it's what I want, this is my fetish, you'd do it for me if you loved me, right? If you try it you might like it, just give it a try! I can tell you're a sub, you give off sub/bottom vibes, you just feel ashamed and you need to accept yourself as a sub!" - all things I have personally been told.)

Yet one professor confidently declared that at birth, we are all handed a “gender envelope” containing our gender identity, and that this identity can’t be affected by outside forces like trauma or culture

Well fuck, I guess mine got lost in the mail! Or... perhaps they just don't award this stupid fucking white american(TM) concept to Russian kids.

But seriously though, I really don't understand this (disturbingly increasing belief) that not only is "gender identity" innate for trans people, that EVERYONE has a "gender identity" or inner sense of gender they identify with.

When I directly asked one professor in the program whether very young children were really psychologically ready for exposure to some kinds of content, he argued that “age appropriateness” was a conservative myth. For the AASECT faithful, no age is too young to encourage a child to wonder whether they identify as a non-binary, polyamorous, kinky, pansexual.

In one class activity, Dr. Green had the class vote (anonymously) about which age they think a variety of topics in sexuality education should be taught. For each topic, the bulk of the class voted “elementary school.”

...I have no fucking words for this. This is why I feel like I'm getting more "socially conservative" and why I believe that, for example, the topics of sex (beyond "how babies are made) & sexual orientation/homosexuality should not be taught to children under 16. This especially makes my blood boil because I have firsthand experience with this shit, I was given unrestricted access to the internet as a young child and stumbled upon a lot of weird sex stuff, and I truly believe it messed me up permanently and was even a major factor in my homosexuality. I really do believe that if I didn't have exposure to all of that I would have turned out normal and healthy.

And if I ended up so screwed up just by stumbling upon sex stuff on the internet on my own time, what the HELL is going to happen to children who are actually sat down in a classroom (or wherever) and directly told about BDSM, polyamory, etc?

But some within AASECT—such as Dr. Michael Aaron, a sex therapist and clinical psychologist—believed the group should come out firmly against the sex addiction model, which he claims is “extremely destructive to clients as it often addresse[s] sexuality concerns from a moralistic and judgmental perspective.”

Oh fuck off. I live with sex addiction. It's hellish. Don't fucking tell me I only feel bad because I'm "sex negative" and need to "embrace it", that's so far from the truth. Sex addiction is real, and it is destructive. There's nothing kinky, progressive, or groundbreaking about it. There are times when I really wish I had a cocaine addiction or something instead because I genuinely believe it would be easier on my body & mind (as well as probably being easier to get help for. When you have a drug addiction everyone can see it's a problem and there's a lot of help out there. When you have a sex addiction and try to find help, you get told that you're a prude and, in my case, "homophobic")

[–]Lesbianese⚢ 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This is why I feel like I'm getting more "socially conservative" and why I believe that, for example, the topics of sex (beyond "how babies are made) & sexual orientation/homosexuality should not be taught to children under 16.

I actually had this exact thought recently. 16+ seems like a reasonable age for learning about sexuality, unless your child comes to you earlier at 14/15, distraught by his/her own feelings. You really don't need to delve any deeper than going Oh, yeah, Jenny has two moms/dads if such a thing were to come up.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Viewing sexual orientation (I decline to use sexuality here so as to not include paraphilia) simply through the lens of oppression is stupid and not helpful. Being gay means we have a very limited dating pool. Being gay or bi means that the majority can’t understand us, and that society is not set up for us. But it doesn’t means that all of society should be set up in such a way we pretend that straight people are not the majority. We just want equal rights where they make sense, not to tear down the fabric of society like these queerists.

I don’t want gay/bi kids to go to therapy and be told that everyone is out to get us. Especially in the west, it’s not true. Even conservatives and Republicans where I am are not fazed by gay people and aren’t trying to overturn gay marriage. They’ve accepted it and moved on. Stop trying to indoctrinate us ffs.

[–]reluctant_commenter 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It is amazing to see these things being taught to mental health professionals. Call me crazy, but I am legitimately nervous about getting a new therapist because I don't know whether they believe shit like this:

Interestingly, though, the mystical “gender envelope” logic sometimes broke down when it came to discussions of sexual orientation. Usually, it was asserted that LGBTQIA+ individuals are born that way. But straight-identifying persons are another story, apparently. Many, we were told, have had their sexual desires artificially limited by social conditioning. Obviously, the phenomenon of closeted men and women is hardly unheard of. Yet I found it notable that the same commitment to unfettered self-identification that’s applied to trans-identifying children young enough to believe in Santa Claus apparently isn’t deemed reliable when it comes to the sexual preferences of their adult parents.

I'm glad this writer chose to speak out, at least.

edit: Does anyone know what these "experts" might be referring to, here? I don't trust the supposed "expertise" of this writer's program leaders, but just curious.

One of my professors had the honesty to explicitly admit that progressives have deliberately distorted scientific data in some areas, exaggerating the extent to which sexual orientation is known to be inborn, to advance their political purposes, albeit in (as he saw it) a good cause. The professor did not condemn the practice, and I was left wondering which of the “scientific” claims I had been fed in the program could be trusted.

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I have a different view of polyamory from the author BUT I also don't think that the vast majority of the population could view it the way I do. As soon as you attach emotions to the relationship you will inevitably bring in jealousy. The number of people who can legitimately experience compersion is going to be incredibly few. Especially if we are talking about people who need to see a doctor for mental health issues. Telling those types of people to start dabbling in polyamory is like pouring gas on their already burning emotions. They could be dealing with an emotionally abusive partner who is just blatantly cheating and then you get a doctor telling you it's ok...