Exposing the propoganda behind the sexuality
Published on February 9, 2005 By messybuu In Current Events

With all the hoopla surrounding Sponge Bob's endorsement of homosexuality on a video about tolerance, and the debunking of "myths" included on that video, I felt it appropriate to contribute to the tolerance by exposing a few more of the myths about homosexuality.

Much of what people know about homosexuality is based either on bad logic, double standards, or pseudoscience. Hopefully, I'll be able to shed light on the lies I have heard people spread so that they will evaporate under the scorching heat of truth.

1. Homosexuals are born homosexual because liking persons of the same gender feels good to them.

WRONG! Just because something feels good does not make it inborn. I like Lindsay Lohan's music, and it feels good to listen to it, so based on the logic that whatever feels good is innate, it should be considered a hate crime to criticize my taste (or anybody else's taste) of music, since it is as natural as green eyes, which would mean that Simon Cowell is the ultimate bigot for criticizing singing that some people like.

2. Homosexuality is genetic as proven by a few pairs of identical twins in which both of the twins were gay.

WRONG! Identical twins are genetically identical. That means they are practically clones of each other. If homosexuality was as genetic as the color of one's eyes, then all homosexuals with an identical twin would have a gay identical twin.

3. Homosexuals are harassed in their childhood, unlike heterosexuals.

WRONG! As a woman told Cabbage Head on Kids in the Hall in response to him having a bad childhood, "Who hasn't?" Many of the people who were taunted, harassed, and/or bullied in childhood aren't homosexual. Some were even harassed because of issues other than sexuality!

4. Homosexuals are underrepresented in the media.

WRONG! Will and Grace, Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, and the L Word are but a few of the many examples of homosexuality in the media. Anybody who homosexuality is underrepresented in the media has never watched television, read a newspaper, read a book, or went outside! Now, one could say that polyamory, another alternative sexuality, is underrepresented in the media, but notice how homosexual sympathizers, who claim to fight for people who are minorities because of their sexuality, don't even care.

5. Democrats support gay marriage.

WRONG! If Democrats support gay marriage so much, then why has legislation to ban gay marriage passed in even very Democratic states, such as California? Blame the religious right as much as you want, but it's clear that Democrats either oppose gay marriage, or don't care enough about the issue to vote against anti-gay marriage legislation, and neither seems like support of gay marriage.

6. Opposing gay marriage is equivalent to thinking homosexuals are subhuman.

Perhaps! If that is true, then that means that sympathizers of homosexuality who oppose polygamous marriages think of those who practice polygamy as subhuman, just like the Nazis thought of the Jews.

7. Homosexual sympathizers don't stereotype homosexuals.

WRONG! Ever hear of Clay Aiken? Ever hear how people accepting of homosexuality insist he's gay just because he acts effeminately? How is calling a man gay because he acts effeminately any better than a homophobe stereotyping homosexuals as effeminate? After all, both sides seem to agree that being effeminate is a sign of homosexuality.

8. Many homosexuals have children.

WRONG! Firstly, members of the same gender cannot have children together no matter how many times they have sex. Secondly, if homosexuals are having sex with members of the opposite gender, then how are they homosexual? Doesn't homosexuality mean that they are only attracted to members of the same sex? If not, then I can claim to be a homosexual even though I'd never have sex with a man!

"But they didn’t know they were homosexual when they had heterosexual sex!" If that's the case, then the homosexual sympathizers are implying that, if homosexuality is natural, that homosexuals are complete dumb asses completely oblivious to the signals of their own bodies

9. If homosexuality is a choice, then homosexuals are evil and must be destroyed!

WRONG! This too is implied by homosexual sympathizers. They insist that homosexuals must be tolerated because homosexuality is natural, as if homosexuals shouldn’t be tolerated if it isn’t natural. They are wrong though. Even if homosexuals are different, they should be treated with the same respect as any other human being.

And that is true tolerance. It’s not about just tolerating those who are different genetically or naturally. It is about tolerating those who are different, no matter the reason.


Comments
on Feb 09, 2005
Hmm...I've never actually heard of half of these myths...in fact the only myth that you bring up that I've heard of is the effeminate/gay thing...which obviously isn't true if you take a walk into any prison.

As I always say when relating to homosexuality- "If you're gay, good for you...just go be gay over there and leave me out of it"

~Zoo
on Feb 09, 2005
double post
on Feb 09, 2005
2. Homosexuality is genetic as proven by a few pairs of identical twins in which both of the twins were gay. WRONG! Identical twins are genetically identical. That means they are practically clones of each other. If homosexuality was as genetic as the color of one's eyes, then all homosexuals with an identical twin would have a gay identical twin.


Most genetic traits, especially behavioural ones, are a result of both nature and nuture. There isn't really a nature or nuture debate anymore as we realise that they are both equally important. There may be many different biological and psychological routes to being gay.

8. Many homosexuals have children. WRONG! Firstly, members of the same gender cannot have children together no matter how many times they have sex. Secondly, if homosexuals are having sex with members of the opposite gender, then how are they homosexual? Doesn't homosexuality mean that they are only attracted to members of the same sex? If not, then I can claim to be a homosexual even though I'd never have sex with a man! "But they didn’t know they were homosexual when they had heterosexual sex!" If that's the case, then the homosexual sympathizers are implying that, if homosexuality is natural, that homosexuals are complete dumb asses completely oblivious to the signals of their own bodies


You can have sex with someone of the opposite sex and still be gay. I have many gay friend sand some weren't sure they were gay until they tried it out with women. It doesn't mean they didn't know they were gay deep down, its just that they were brought up with people telling them that they should be attracted to the opposite sex and so perhaps they ignored their feelings or at least didn't except them for what they were. That doesn't make them dumb arses it just means like most humans they can be in denile about facts they don't won't to except.

WRONG! This too is implied by homosexual sympathizers. They insist that homosexuals must be tolerated because homosexuality is natural, as if homosexuals shouldn’t be tolerated if it isn’t natural. They are wrong though. Even if homosexuals are different, they should be treated with the same respect as any other human being. And that is true tolerance. It’s not about just tolerating those who are different genetically or naturally. It is about tolerating those who are different, no matter the reason.
I think homosexuals should be accepted not tolerated.
on Feb 10, 2005
Most genetic traits, especially behavioural ones, are a result of both nature and nuture. There isn't really a nature or nuture debate anymore as we realise that they are both equally important. There may be many different biological and psychological routes to being gay.


So, it might be as natural as being a jerk, which means that we should not dislike jerks for being jerks, for that is a hate crime.

You can have sex with someone of the opposite sex and still be gay. I have many gay friend sand some weren't sure they were gay until they tried it out with women. It doesn't mean they didn't know they were gay deep down, its just that they were brought up with people telling them that they should be attracted to the opposite sex and so perhaps they ignored their feelings or at least didn't except them for what they were. That doesn't make them dumb arses it just means like most humans they can be in denile about facts they don't won't to except.


Does telling women I'm gay and that I want to make sure by having sex with them actually work?

And if a homosexual could enjoy sex with women, then why would those homosexuals need to have sex with women to find out if they were truly homosexual, since many homosexuals have enjoyed sex with women and only later in life (sometimes due to abuse, sometimes due to other issues), realize that they're gay.

And if somebody can be a homosexual and still have pleasurable sex with women, then consider me a homosexual.

I guess I'm confused by how some homosexuals claim they knew they were homosexual at a young age and couldn't change it, and yet some just find out when it's convenient for them.

I think homosexuals should be accepted not tolerated.


Perhaps, but then people would have to be accepting of people of all sexualities, from the heterosexual to the homosexual, from the monogamous to the polygamous, and the world isn't ready for that.
on Feb 10, 2005
So, it might be as natural as being a jerk, which means that we should not dislike jerks for being jerks, for that is a hate crime.


That wasn't the point I was making at all. I'm just saying that that it is neither nature or nuture but both. You seem to be soley in the nuture camp I 'm just saying you're probably wrong....sorry I mean "WRONG!"

The difference between a jerk and a gay person is that the gay person's gayness doesn't affect you out side of their personal life. So the situation isn't even analogous.

Does telling women I'm gay and that I want to make sure by having sex with them actually work?

And if a homosexual could enjoy sex with women, then why would those homosexuals need to have sex with women to find out if they were truly homosexual, since many homosexuals have enjoyed sex with women and only later in life (sometimes due to abuse, sometimes due to other issues), realize that they're gay.

And if somebody can be a homosexual and still have pleasurable sex with women, then consider me a homosexual.

I guess I'm confused by how some homosexuals claim they knew they were homosexual at a young age and couldn't change it, and yet some just find out when it's convenient for them.


I didn't say they enjoyed having sex with the woman. In fact one gay guy I know that tried had a real problem getting it up for a woman when he tried to have sex with her, and that apparently was a big clue.

You can't seem to draw a distinction between being sexually attracted to someone and enjoying the physical sensation of having sex with them. I've heard that sometimes woman have orgasms when they've been raped it doesn't mean they enjoyed it.

It isn't the just act of gay sex that makes you gay but the sexual attraction, so you may very well be gay if you find men sexually attractive. Also there is the extra complication that sexuality doesn't just fit into neat little boxes like gay and straight. You may have a certain amount of attraction to a both sexes but not enough to one that you'd want to have sex with them or have a relationship with them as opposed to a true bisexual that may be willing to go both ways.

Perhaps, but then people would have to be accepting of people of all sexualities, from the heterosexual to the homosexual, from the monogamous to the polygamous, and the world isn't ready for that.


Maybe not but I'm just saying that's the goal they should aspire to. Before you say anything I should say it doesn't mean that even pedophila should be accepted I'm just saying that if someones lifestyle doesn't hurt anyone else it should be accepted.
on Feb 10, 2005
That wasn't the point I was making at all. I'm just saying that that it is neither nature or nuture but both. You seem to be soley in the nuture camp I 'm just saying you're probably wrong....sorry I mean "WRONG!"


I understand your point, and I could agree that it, along with pretty much every other psychological trait we have, is a mixture of nature and nurture.

The difference between a jerk and a gay person is that the gay person's gayness doesn't affect you out side of their personal life. So the situation isn't even analogous.


The thing is, it does affect people outside their personal life. It's the same reason not only people who disapprove of homosexuality have a problem with polygamy, swinging, promiscuity, people with some disgusting but consensual fetishes, etc. It doesn't affect them, but they still have something to say about it.

I didn't say they enjoyed having sex with the woman. In fact one gay guy I know that tried had a real problem getting it up for a woman when he tried to have sex with her, and that apparently was a big clue.


Maybe I watch too many sitcoms, but doesn't that sometimes happen to heterosexuals having sex with heterosexual partners?

You can't seem to draw a distinction between being sexually attracted to someone and enjoying the physical sensation of having sex with them. I've heard that sometimes woman have orgasms when they've been raped it doesn't mean they enjoyed it.


The difference between a woman being raped and a gay man having sex with a woman is that the gay man is choosing to have sex with that woman, and although the woman might have had some physical pleasure (just like I'm sure I would feel physical pleasure from a man giving me oral sex), that does not mean she enjoyed it emotionally. The violation definitely outweighs anything her body might have felt. As the cliche goes, actions speak louder than words, and saying "I'm gay and I like guys" doesn't mean much if that gay guy is having sex with women.

It isn't the just act of gay sex that makes you gay but the sexual attraction, so you may very well be gay if you find men sexually attractive. Also there is the extra complication that sexuality doesn't just fit into neat little boxes like gay and straight. You may have a certain amount of attraction to a both sexes but not enough to one that you'd want to have sex with them or have a relationship with them as opposed to a true bisexual that may be willing to go both ways.


Then perhaps bisexual would be a more appropriate term for many homosexuals, since many have had sex with women more than once (and I don't know, I just don't think I'd do something that I didn't enjoy overall again if I didn't have to).
on Feb 10, 2005
First of all I'd like to say I appreciate the fact you are actually trying argue the case instead of saying "your a poo poo head" as is often the case on forums.

Maybe I watch too many sitcoms, but doesn't that sometimes happen to heterosexuals having sex with heterosexual partners?


True but in this case it wasn't a psychological or a medical problem it was just that he wasn't attracted to her.

As the cliche goes, actions speak louder than words, and saying "I'm gay and I like guys" doesn't mean much if that gay guy is having sex with women.


The problem is they aren't saying "I'm gay and I like guys" I'm talking about gay people that haven't admitted to themself that they are gay.

The difference between a woman being raped and a gay man having sex with a woman is that the gay man is choosing to have sex with that woman, and although the woman might have had some physical pleasure (just like I'm sure I would feel physical pleasure from a man giving me oral sex), that does not mean she enjoyed it emotionally.


Perhaps I used a bad example with the rape thing. You are making the same point I was point I trying make when you say "the woman might have had some physical pleasure (just like I'm sure I would feel physical pleasure from a man giving me oral sex), that does not mean she enjoyed it emotionally". I'm saying the gay man even though he chooses to have sex with the woman he and he enjoys it phsyically doesn't mean he enjoys it emotionally.

It hard to explain when I'm talking from second hand experience. The people I've talked have actually experienced it and so unless they are lying (which they have no incentive to do) I'd have to say it is possible. The best way for heteros like us to imagine the situation is to imagine the opposite situation: Just imagine if you were born into a world where homosexuality is the norm (they reproduce through IVF or something) you may feel socially pressured to have a homo relationship. In our world this may seem disgusting if you weren't gay, but in this world there is no social stigma because everyone would be doing it. In fact the heteros would be the outcasts. So to try to fit in you have a homo relationship but deep down you know that you would rather be having sex with opposite sex. It is hard to to imagine from our perspective because part of our disgust with the notion of having sex with a man is from the social stigma not just the act itself. So I'm saying that gay people often try to fit in and they can do it more easily than you might think because there is no social stigma attached to be hetero but it doesn't mean they enjoy it emotionally, it is just going through the motions.

Then perhaps bisexual would be a more appropriate term for many homosexuals, since many have had sex with women more than once


It depends on the situation. If the man is having sex with a woman just to in I don't think the term bisexual really counts. It is the intention that matters. After all you can be a virgin without being a celebate because that implys that you are deliberately abstaining from sex.

(and I don't know, I just don't think I'd do something that I didn't enjoy overall again if I didn't have to).


Well as I explained above you don't have any incentive to do something (or should that be someone) that you didn't want to because their is no stigma attached to being hetero. If you were beaten up, disowned by your parents, constantly teased at school and generally discriminated against because of your hetero orientation you might think differently.

Thanks for the debate, it's been fun .