What are your honest thoughts on homosexuality and other nonhetero sexualities?

[FrodoSkywalker007]

[Anonymous]

I think you're gay or down low. You have an obsession with the gays

[FrodoSkywalker007]

Cool ☺

[Anonymous]

Doesn’t affect me

[Opinion Owner]

Just curious, you ask these kinds of questions a lot…

[FrodoSkywalker007]

Dm me if you'd like 🤷‍♂️

[capriVib]

I've never really met anyone like that in real life. I live in a small place, so that might have something to do with it.

But online, quite a few gay guys have messaged me over the years. They'd usually ask what my orientation was and stuff like that. Some would send me pictures, and one guy even gave me his home address. Once I told them I was straight, they usually just talked normally. I don't think they're harmful or anything, most of them seemed pretty friendly.

But I still can't really wrap my head around how a man can be attracted to another man. Sometimes it feels like maybe some people do it for attention, or because things didn't work out with the opposite sex and they ended up going that way instead.

[FrodoSkywalker007]

32% if Gen Z women are LGBTQ 🤷‍♂️

[FrodoSkywalker007]

For men, it was like 11%
So, roughly 1 in 10 Gen Z males and 1 in 3 Gen Z females is LGBTQ 🤷‍♂️

[capriVib]

Having numbers that high probably isn't great for a country either as far as i know lgbt is heavily restricted in countries like china and russia im not saying everything happened bc of lgbt of course but Europe doesn't seem to be producing enough younger generations anymore and with the weakening family structure and aging population it kinda feels like Europe has already handed the throne over to china and other Asian countries.

[FrodoSkywalker007]

It's less to do with that than other cultural issues.
Remember, Japan has an extremely low birth rate as well. This is a common theme in all westernized nations, regardless of sphere.
Most western nations have developed different values over the decades. For example, an emphasis on career. There is also the rise of feminism.
China was also forced to slow its birthrate (1 child policy).

Europe stopped bring a major influence after the world wars.

[capriVib]

Yeah birth rates are low everywhere but countries like China still have this massive population base supporting them. China doesn't really have much that's uniquely its own either, their fighter jets look copied from the US, their cars copied from the Germans etc. They basically became a manufacturing giant by copy pasting almost everything and producing it with cheap labor, so the correlation with having a huge young and dynamic population seemed obvious to me.

[FrodoSkywalker007]

True, they are notorious for stealing technology.
That large population doesn't seem to help them creatively 🤷‍♂️ India is even worse. at least China is competitive in some things.

[Rorroto]

I've never had trouble relating to homosexuality as a strait guy. I figure strait women probably have many similar feelings about men as men have about women. I just apply that to gay guys.

[Rorroto]

I think we'd definitely be better off bisexual though. They are the master race: no negatives and only more options. The more we normalize that so people come out of the closet, the better. Unfortunately, we've got a lot of purely strait people (like myself) which sucks.

I figure... lower population growth for humanity in general is a victory, because we'll use up fewer resources. It is a danger for wealthier nations, but I'm hoping we can solve that with immigration, and I don't think that's the result of the LGBTQ+ so much as the natural result of higher standards of living leading to lifestyles in which children are a luxury rather than a benefit... which I like actually. It means we might well be able to naturally prevent overpopulation just by raising living standards in impoverished nations.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

I mean, I would have to have a positive set of thoughts on being gay or various other forms of queer life, pretty much all of LGBT considering i am married to another woman and I am pansexual.

I think everyone should have a chance to love who they want as long as it is consensual. We usually don't make a big deal out of heterosexuals so I am not sure why they are so insistent on trying to convert us or calling us mentally ill. Those kinda of people have issues themselves. There is nothing wrong with us. Just let us be and to coexist peacefully with us.

[sage2021]

I have always wondered why they have to broadcast it to everyone at any chance they get.

I'm 100% straight but I don't say that to everyone I meet or around. And I would feel weird saying it, because who cares?🤷🏼‍♀️

[Maybe_Maybe_not]

I've been raised to embrace differences whenever these differences aren't threatening people, it's a fair philosophy to me so I'll just keep going with it

[Alex-Snow]

I'm straight but have no issues with those that are LGBTQ. Life is short and people should have sex and relationships with what they are comfortable with.

[slatyb]

I don't much think about them. Why would I? I don't care what other people get up to in their bedroom.

[Kvass]

It's a mental illness, but as long as they stay away from kids I don't care about them.

[itss_lily]

stay away from kids? why do you say this about lgbtq people and not hetero people?

[Rorroto]

Every single time I hear someone say homosexuality is a mental illness, that makes me think you're not strait. I am 100% strait. I would have no more interest in guys than I do now, were I stuck in prison for decades. I know this, because I'm a 41 year old virgin and still have zero interest in guys. That's not a choice for me, and so that you see it as a mental illness rather than something people are born with makes me suspicious.

I can look at two men kissing and think "Aw, that's sweet." I won't want to look closely, or I'd get grossed out, but I can glance at it and think that. Other strait people may get grossed out but not feel aggressive.

By any chance do you think your aggression toward homosexuality is done for the same reason little boys throw rocks at little girls they have crushes on to hide their affection for them? I'm just saying... it's a possible explanation.

[Rorroto]

I don't know if you've got good data indicating that non-strait people have a higher chance of being child molesters than strait people or not... but I do know that men have a WAY higher chance of being child molesters than women, regardless of their orientation. Therefore, I'm pretty sure that if you want to bash the gays, you should at least be a man-hating super feminist first.

[DonaldDarko]

Sexuality is something between men and women. Anything else means something has gone wrong.

[Rorroto]

That doesn't make any sense. If people didn't have an attraction to the same sex... they simply would not be doing things that result from that attraction to the same sex. I have zero attraction to the same sex. I'd have no motive, ever, to do what gay men do. I'd find that repulsive. That's why I assume they must have different inborne feelings than me. There's no other possible explanation, so far as I can tell.

Plus, homosexuality is something in which, even if it were spread through culture (which it's clearly not) there'd be zero downsides. It's like, with men you have more STD's but no unplanned pregnancies, so it's just a trade off. With lesbians, there's an extremely low chance of STD transfer as well as no unplanned pregnancies. There's no possible reason to be concerned about homosexuality, unless we're also concerned just about as much about heterosexuality.

[DonaldDarko]

@Rorroto Sex only exists in nature for reproduction. If it does not serve that purpose then something has gone wrong.

[Rorroto]

You sir need to work on building up your critical thinking skills. You claimed "Sex only exists in nature for reproduction. If it does not serve that purpose then something is wrong."

Sex fulfills the evolutionary goal of reproduction. There is zero reason why that should have anything whatsoever to do with your and my goals though. Your and my goals should be focused on improving our quality of life and living well... such as through, if I were bisexual, possibly dating a guy and never procreating and achieving sexual outlets exclusively through that guy.

[DonaldDarko]

@Rorroto It's not me that's lacking critical thinking skills I see. You don't seem to understand what defect looks like even. If you're attracted to the same sex something has gone wrong. It's no different than if you're born. missing a limb. It's not normal or healthy snd will dammage your quality of life.

[Rorroto]

There are people who don't want to be parents. Therefore it would be bad that they are parents, because being parents, apparently, would reduce their quality of life (because of the not wanting to be parents). That's just how evolution works sometimes. We evolved to spread our genes, but along the way the traits that led us to do that optimally had side-effects that will often result in behaviors that may not actually lead to more procreation... such as our ability to reason and plan for the future that likely led to the better survival of our species leading us to think about how we might want things in life that having children would get in the way of, and such.

For reasons like that, it doesn't make any sense to presume a trait of someone is bad... just because it doesn't enhance the likelihood of procreation. You need to think of some reason why attractions to the same sex are bad before defining them as a defect. I don't see how homosexuality could be any worse than heterosexuality. There is a higher chance of STD's spreading amongst men, but lesbians have a much lower chance... and bisexuals are clearly just the master race. They have more options with zero downsides.

The only reason why we call anything a "defect" is if it causes some kind of decreased quality of life. I don't see how homosexuality would, and even if it would, it appears to be permanent. Gay conversion therapy doesn't appear to work.

[DonaldDarko]

@Rorroto It makes no differenc what someone wants. Sex evolved for procreation. If your sexual drives don't focus on the opposite sex thats a failure mode. It means the mechanism is defective. https://legacy.nimbios.org/press/FS_homosexuality

We evolved to sense disease and avoid it. Good thing given horrible disease like AIDS.

www.psypost.org/.../

[Rorroto]

Of course it matters what people want. That's the only possible reason anyone can have for doing anything: wanting to do the thing, or helping other people get things they want, both of which are frequently obtained through homosexual relationships.

You know what else evolution has resulted in? Octopi die after procreating. Their entire procreative cycle is therefore basically a terrible mental disease. Evolutionary drives are mindless and don't care about what benefits you and I. Only your and my conscience mind can determine what's best for us.

Yeah... male homosexuality has an increased chance of STDs. Lesbians have a significantly reduced chance of getting STDs though and heterosexual intercourse has a chance of inadvertently creating human beings. You therefore can't say homosexuality is any more of a "failure" than heterosexuality, based on your present arguments.

Regarding your link that notes that strait men watching gay men kissing is similar to them seeing maggots... yeah, that might very plausibly be an evolutionary motive for feeling icky about homosexuality. That may well be why pre-pubescent children can see heterosexual intercourse as gross too. 'Doesn't mean either is bad for everyone though.

Regarding your study on epigenetics, that's interesting, but I'd say ultimately irrelevant to our conversation. Regardless of how homosexuality came to be, we know people want it. Therefore you have to think of some reason why it is bad before we can describe it as a mental illness, or bad... unless you're also willing to describe heterosexuality as a mental illness/bad. If you'd say that of both, you'd be consistent. I'd say both heterosexuality and homosexuality could be described as being equally destructive to society.

[DonaldDarko]

@Rorroto It is bad simply because it's dysfunctional. The comorbidities are just further proof. People don't eant to be homosexual they just are. No one given a choice would choose homosexuality. People don't want asthma either because it sucks.

[Rorroto]

I would choose homosexuality over heterosexuality. I have a physical attraction to women. I dislike that, because it makes it more difficult to get female friends. I'm aromantic so I don't experience romantic love.

Homosexuality is not dysfunctional. In many ways, but not all, it's superior to heterosexuality. Its biggest advantage is that it's a superior system for the creation of children than heterosexuality. With heterosexuality, lust tempts people into having children when they don't want children. Homosexual women are just as capable of getting pregnant as heterosexual women though, but every single time they get pregnant it will be because they want children.

99% of the time heterosexual intercourse happens due to lust rather than procreation. What would be best for our species is if we can alter ourselves so that procreation is no longer tied to lust at all so that we're no longer risking producing unwanted children just to get sex. Homosexual people already have achieved that.

Asthma is something that causes intrinsic harm. Homosexuality does not cause intrinsic harm.

[DonaldDarko]

@Rorroto Nope if its not between a man and a woman it's not valid.

[Rorroto]

I've stomped your arguments into the ground. You're taking the coward's way out and relying on pure, rockheaded stubbornness now. If you just admit that I clearly won this it'll be good for you and lead to personal growth.

That doesn't make any damn sense to just arbitrarily decide that "if it's not between a man and a woman it's not valid."

[DonaldDarko]

@Rorroto A lot if mental gymnastics to convince probably yourself more than me. Naturally I don't agree with any of if. Now you're getting butthurt about it. Too bad for you looks like.

[Rorroto]

I've responded to every one of your claims with attempts and logic and reason. You've seen my whole reasoning process. If there are gaps that don't make sense, you could try to point them out the way I've been attempting to point out gaps in your reasoning.

Your last comment just, flat out, contained a claim that you seemed to arbitrarily pull out of your rectum. That's just be being naturally annoyed with stubbornness.

[DonaldDarko]

@Rorroto You haven't disproven anything. Sex evolved fir reproduction. That's all there is to it. Anything that does not facilitate reproduction is not healthy or normal. It is defect. Nothing else matters you can try and bend reality you can grasp at straws you can say what about someone's preference or what ever. I makes 0 difference sex evolved the way it did. Reality is reality not what someone wishes it was.

[Rorroto]

I refuted this statement of yours' previously. It doesn't matter what sex evolved for because we do not live to spread our genes. We live to live good lives.

Homosexual intercourse is a superior means of reproduction than heterosexual intercourse, because when lesbians get pregnant, it is 100% of the time because they wanted to get pregnant. 99% of the time heterosexual intercourse is done to achieve pleasure, not procreation, and therefore heterosexuals have a massive risk of creating unwanted children through sex that homosexuals never have to deal with.

[DonaldDarko]

@Rorroto This is exactly what I'm talking about. Mental gymnastics grasping at straws anything to try and twist the facts to your fantasy. And you're smug about it.

[Rorroto]

What mental gymnastics have I engaged in? I pointed out that just because the goal of evolution is to procreate... that doesn't have anything to do with what your and my goals should be.

Furthermore, believing that homosexuality is somehow flawed because it doesn't lead to procreation implies that every woman not popping out 20 babies is flawed too. If all that matters is procreation... then there are a whole lot of people more flawed than gay people.

I deserve to be smug about my position, because I've got a very reasonable position.

[Agape93]

I dont care. Love who you want and fuck who you want. Long as everyone's 18+ and consenting.

[Anonymous]

It doesn’t seem normal to me but I don’t care if other people want to do it behind closed doors when I am not around to hear or watch.

[Dargil]

Seems like there are just two choices: Hetero and Not.

[Staximus]

I don’t give a damn what other people do as long as they don’t try to make it my business

[Anonymous]

Straight men and lesbians are the only normal sane people. But as a result we date total loons

[Levin]

Seems a bit gay but to each their own.

[queenofcardio]

I just don't care

[exitseven]

everyone has different preferences.

[Anonymous]

My wife is an ex lesbian

[Brady]

It's OK, you should have made this a poll.

[NathanDavis]

love is love

[Anonymous]

I am ok with it

[MrChinaski]

Love is love.

[Anonymous]

Don’t care.

[Pterodon]

Disgusting

[In_Trance]

Mental illness

[Rorroto]

That doesn't make any sense to call something a mental illness that has no more downsides than heterosexuality. Gay men have higher chances of STD transfer but no unplanned pregnancies. Lesbians have a significantly decreased chance of STD transfer and no unplanned pregnancies. Bisexual people are basically the master race because they have more options without negatives. We need to just genetically engineer everyone to be bisexual.

[In_Trance]

That's the dumbest this I've ever read.

EVERY single homo exists because of straight people.

[Rorroto]

No... a lot of them may well exist because of bisexual people. Bisexuality could have zero negative impact on procreation whatsoever.

But, one thing I've heard that might explain why purely gay people exist could have to do with similar strategy as what happens in ant colonies. In ant colonies, the extreme majority of the members of the colony are sterile. This is still a valid evolutionary strategy because, though you spread more of your genes if you, yourself, procreate, your siblings still share a lot of your genes too, so you'd have an evolutionary advantage to help your siblings as well.

Noting that, I've heard that the more brothers you without sisters the more likely it is that one of them will be gay. Maybe that could help decrease hostility between brothers and competition for mates and the gay guy could, instead, help raise his brothers' children to increase the likelihood of his brothers' genes spreading, or something like that.

It really doesn't matter that much because we know that people have a strong attraction to the same sex... or else they would not act on that attraction for reasons besides desperation. If people didn't have some powerful attraction to the same sex we shouldn't see things like gay marriage. We'd only see flings.

[In_Trance]

The question is about homos. Not bi. Homos.

[Rorroto]

No, it's about "homosexuality and other non-hetero sexualities."

Plus, there's often not going to be much of a difference between bisexuality and homosexuality. For a lot of people they're just more to one side than the other.

Plus, the guy I was talking to said "it's a mental illness." If homosexuality is a mental illness... why the heck wouldn't bisexuality be a mental illness too? Either it's okay to sleep with dudes, or it's not. If it's not, bisexuality has the same issue as homosexuality.

[In_Trance]

You're getting worse with every response.
The question asked for thoughts. You can respond with your thoughts just as I did with mine you don't have to like it. I really don't give a fuck. There's nothing normal about a guy taking a cock in the ass and a load down his throat.
It's mental illness. Every homo is a small part of them that wishes they were straight. but they're not. They know damn well that they can't function in a hetro relationship.