Being gay is a choice

[BlackMamba47]

Well, as a gay male, I think I should provide some clarity and insight to this debate, as I think many people are using terms that aren't exactly synonymous.

I see many gay people equate "gay" with "homosexual". You cannot do that, as they mean different things, subtle differences, but difference all the same.

Someone who is a homosexual is attracted to people of the same sex, be it male of female. I'm sure all of us can agree on that.

However, the concept of "gay" and a "gay culture" is a recent phenomenon. One can be homosexual and choose not to be "gay". Those people aren't merely closeted. Their feelings towards the same sex are no different, but it's how they choose to live their life that determines what term fits.

Thus, the OP, in my opinion, is entirely correct, and I would agree wholeheartedly. I was born a homosexual, no doubt about it, but I didn't come out and thus enter that "gay" life until I was 18, and that was a choice I made. I could have very well remained in the closet (or in my case, just be asexual as I did nothing with either sex), still been a homosexual, but not have been "gay".

Simply put, acknowledging, accepting, and jumping into "gay" life is a choice. The problem arises because people wrongly believe two terms to be synonyms when they aren't.

 

[AsianDream]

Oh, no need to get your panties in a knot. Just saying some people choose not to act out on being gay that's all. It really just boils down to your morals and beliefs.

Quite like my panties in a knot - but more of a kink fetish forum topic

Trying to not act on your basic desires is real dumb - no way flimsy ideas of morals and religion etc can ever beat what you really want deep inside.

 

[Comtemplation]

I had an interesting conversation with my friend about this when she asked if me being gay was a choice, to which I answered of course not, though it was purely my choice to embrace than to suppress it like I had been for about a decade. I believe that homosexuality is biological via series of factors including genetics, environment, and upbringing.

To that she says, if I claim that it's biological, wouldn't that make sound like if its a "disease" of the brain or something, to which I say no. And no, she's not like judging me or anything, she's just curious, and she does support gays.

 

[Fireballs]

Quite like my panties in a knot - but more of a kink fetish forum topic

Trying to not act on your basic desires is real dumb - no way flimsy ideas of morals and religion etc can ever beat what you really want deep inside.

Are you serious? That's where you're wrong. Some people take great pride in what they believe in and don't want something like homosexuality or whatever to bring them down.

 

[Fireballs]

The only way they would see homosexuality as bringing them down is if they held the view that homosexuality is wrong. If they themselves were homosexual, they would be pretty repressed, and thats not a good thing.

How many catholic priests have been caught playing where they shouldn't because they tried to place their beliefs above their own nature?

They repress it because they believe that's what is right. And yeah, perhaps there will be a few snags down the road every now and then but they're still being strong. I mean, if you had autism, wouldn't you want to repress that if all possible?

And I'm not too sure about catholic priests because from what I've heard they prey on little boys. That would be wrong regardless whether they were caught with a boy or a girl because messing around with children definitely isn't right!

 

[Fireballs]

I don't believe its possible to repress disability, you manage them.

Repressing a part of your identity is bound to have complications, whether it leads to a nervous breakdown or suicide or in the case of some catholic priests to pedaresty whereby they gain a release by using the primary outlet available that they can maintain a control over, youngsters by intimidation.

Its not a sign of strength to repress, its a sign of strength to EXpress. If they feel their faith is more important than their identity, i'd say perhaps they are erring.

Perhaps they're managing their homosexuality also. Who's to argue that it isn't a disability because the cause of it hasn't even been discovered yet. And people don't have to choose to repress it because of religious reasons, perhaps they do it for their family, or because of their own personal moral code.

Which I guess in turn comes back to the topic, yes you can choose to repress/manage your homosexuality.

 

[Fireballs]

I'm not certain any suggestion was made that you can't repress/manage homosexuality?
The same would be true of heterosexuality.

Yeah, true. But there really isn't any real reason to suppress one's heterosexuality.

 

[BoiOnFire]

Yeah, true. But there really isn't any real reason to suppress one's heterosexuality.

And there really isn't any real reason to suppress one's homosexuality either.....Suppressing any aspects of your personality will eventually backfire...ask a rapist, arsonist, serial killer...suppressing urges will only increase the need to consummate those urges....The real question that needs to be asked is why heterosexuals feel so threatened by homosexuality... homosexuality has been with us as a species since the beginning, it serves some purpose that we now do not understand....is it an over population mechanism? Who knows but to deny it, or limit the rights of others simply because of that determining factor only shows the heterosexual population's insecurity with themselves....There have been many times in history where homosexuality was celebrated and respected and seen for what it truly is, another variation on the most amazing animal this planet has ever produced. If you as a person hate yourself because society in general disapproves of your sexuality then I pity you, honestly.

 

[Fireballs]

And there really isn't any real reason to suppress one's homosexuality either.....Suppressing any aspects of your personality will eventually backfire...ask a rapist, arsonist, serial killer...suppressing urges will only increase the need to consummate those urges....The real question that needs to be asked is why heterosexuals feel so threatened by homosexuality... homosexuality has been with us as a species since the beginning, it serves some purpose that we now do not understand....is it an over population mechanism? Who knows but to deny it, or limit the rights of others simply because of that determining factor only shows the heterosexual population's insecurity with themselves....There have been many times in history where homosexuality was celebrated and respected and seen for what it truly is, another variation on the most amazing animal this planet has ever produced. If you as a person hate yourself because society in general disapproves of your sexuality then I pity you, honestly.

Uhh, I don't think heterosexuals feel threatened by homosexuality. Perhaps some do, but I know I don't. It's just not for me. And to say you pity me? LOL!

 

[Fireballs]

The only reason for supressing homosexuality is a result of bigotry and its associated shame.

There should and is for many no reason to hide who they are.

And even if it is felt valid to repress, could a heterosexual be expected to live their lives without a partner?

Well, if that's what the heterosexual wanted. Society of course would never impose something like that on them though, so it would solely be their choice.

 

[vinnysword45]

It wasnt my choice!

 

[Harker]

Whenever someone has confronted me with that I tell them that while it may be their own choice to repress their own bisexuality and not act on attractions to both sexes, I myself am not bisexual, and am only attracted to men.

 

[ibill1]

It's a choice to act out on being gay I suppose.

Do you "act out" being straight. What a ridiculous comment.

 

[ibill1]

Well, as a gay male, I think I should provide some clarity and insight to this debate, as I think many people are using terms that aren't exactly synonymous.

I see many gay people equate "gay" with "homosexual". You cannot do that, as they mean different things, subtle differences, but difference all the same.

Someone who is a homosexual is attracted to people of the same sex, be it male of female. I'm sure all of us can agree on that.

However, the concept of "gay" and a "gay culture" is a recent phenomenon. One can be homosexual and choose not to be "gay". Those people aren't merely closeted. Their feelings towards the same sex are no different, but it's how they choose to live their life that determines what term fits.

Thus, the OP, in my opinion, is entirely correct, and I would agree wholeheartedly. I was born a homosexual, no doubt about it, but I didn't come out and thus enter that "gay" life until I was 18, and that was a choice I made. I could have very well remained in the closet (or in my case, just be asexual as I did nothing with either sex), still been a homosexual, but not have been "gay".

Simply put, acknowledging, accepting, and jumping into "gay" life is a choice. The problem arises because people wrongly believe two terms to be synonyms when they aren't.

Are you serious? That's where you're wrong. Some people take great pride in what they believe in and don't want something like homosexuality or whatever to bring them down.

Perhaps they're managing their homosexuality also. Who's to argue that it isn't a disability because the cause of it hasn't even been discovered yet. And people don't have to choose to repress it because of religious reasons, perhaps they do it for their family, or because of their own personal moral code.

Which I guess in turn comes back to the topic, yes you can choose to repress/manage your homosexuality.

Uhh, I don't think heterosexuals feel threatened by homosexuality. Perhaps some do, but I know I don't. It's just not for me. And to say you pity me? LOL!

I got to say. Being an older gay male, it has been quite awhile since I've read so much total bullshit in one thread. It's not only embarrassing to the posters who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground but truly laughable.

 

[arpeggi]

Do you "act out" being straight. What a ridiculous comment.

I don't think it's ridiculous at all. To those who do consider being gay a choice, in large part what they mean is that everyone chooses who they have sex with. The whole point of their argument is that you don't have to "act out" on your gay desires, or being attracted to the same sex, which you do not have a choice over.
It isn't going to be emotionally healthy for you and will very likely lead to a life of depression and unhappiness for yourself and possibly others... but you still make a conscious choice whenever you decide to have sex with someone, whether it's "acting out" on certain uncontrollable desires or not.

Which leads to another argument over whether it is your sex life or your sexual desires and who you're attracted to that makes you gay or straight.

 

[ibill1]

^
This only makes sense to people who believe that being gay is morally wrong. It doesn't make the statement any less ridiculous. If I believe heteros shouldn't act out their desires does that make sense? Human Beings are sexual creatures. Sex is apart of being alive. Since I'm only attracted to men, it is not a choice who I have sex with. Humans have sex, I don't have a choice who thats going to be with.

 

[arpeggi]

^
This only makes sense to people who believe that being gay is morally wrong. It doesn't make the statement any less ridiculous. If I believe heteros shouldn't act out their desires does that make sense? Human Beings are sexual creatures. Sex is apart of being alive. Since I'm only attracted to men, it is not a choice who I have sex with. Humans have sex, I don't have a choice who thats going to be with.

One could very well remain celibate, regardless of morality, not acting on their sexual desires. You're attracted to men, you consider yourself gay because of it, you did not choose this, but the physical act itself is a choice for everyone. It has nothing to do with morality.

 

[RyanE23]

As the original thread starter guy (that one got away from me, lol), I was only really pointing out (pun?) the irony of the stereotype of being gay as a choice. The choice in my statement was who I was choosing to tell, not who I was falling in love with.

 

[ibill1]

One could very well remain celibate, regardless of morality, not acting on their sexual desires. You're attracted to men, you consider yourself gay because of it, you did not choose this, but the physical act itself is a choice for everyone. It has nothing to do with morality.

I agree. That is exactly why the statement is redundant. From the time are eyes open in the morning, until they close at night, everything is a choice. What to have for breakfast, what tie to wear, will I go to work etc. etc. We don't choose to be gay but we choose to have sex? It's an argument you usually hear only from people who are not accepting of others homosexuality. Since it is pretty much accepted that we are born this way, lets just say they chose to have sex with same sex partners, and could also choose not to. I think it is a ridiculous argument, since everything in life is a choice. I believe we will have to agree to disagree on the matter.

 

[Fireballs]

Well, it's not a ridiculous argument for the people that don't care to be a homo.