Awareness of gay issues in S'pore: A political perspective

last SG · 2005-08-01T21:17:38+00:00

Thread closed as requested by thread starter

ahpeh SG

Laughing

Atobe SG

Originally posted by earthlings73:
err.. you mean gays can have sex all day without:

1) the need of a job?
2) the need of a place to reside?
3) the need to ensure that one's assets are properly passed on to the intended parties?

Yes, sex is an important part of life.. isn't this the position the Government is trying to preach? In a few months time, Singapore will be holding our very own Sex Exhibition at Expo.. Will that be an political issue then?

And the issue on Casino.. Why did it become a hot topic in this forum? Why is it not considered as a sin and moved over to Eternal Hope?

Because just like the gay issues, it has important social and political implications..

But then, I urge all users to avoid going into theology (whether you are gays, straights who are pro-gays, straights who are anti-gays or closeted gays who are anti-gays).. Leave such discussion to EH.. Loads of people are willing to talk to you there..

Do you mean gays actually work, need a place to reside, and they have assets that need to be passed on ? Laughing

Was it not a requirement that the infected was supposed to be sealed and buried not even to be burnt, in case the ashes becomes too HOT to be handled for fear of contamination similar to radioactive waste ?

Will the cost to decontaminate the assets be worth the trouble to inherit ? Laughing

Was the Sex Exhibition at Expo intended for the Gay Community alone, or was it intended to get the NORMAL Adult population to get into the BIRTH SWING ?

Should the upcoming Sex Exhibition be Political or should it be a Socio-Religious Issue ?

Are the issues concerning Casino and Homosexuals on the same POLITICAL level ?

Unless of course you will accept that HOMOSEXUALS is as corrupting as the CASINO then perhaps the subject on HOMOSEXUALS could be POLITICAL.

Can one avoid going into Theology when HOMOSEXUALITY is primarily concerning MORAL issues, behaviors and preferences ?

BTW under the present Singapore Laws there is nothing prohibiting any HOMOSEXUAL Persons from the following :

1) getting a job - if you can climb on top of the 4.5% pile of jobless.
2) buying or renting a PRIVATE or HDB home if there is a need of a place to reside
3) get a good lawyer to execute a WILL so as to fulfill the need to ensure that one's assets are properly passed on to the intended parties

Why are you creating a fuss over NOTHING - just to obtain publicity for your HOMOSEXUAL leanings ?

Atobe SG

Originally posted by earthlings73:
Heng did not invent the term Heterosexism. It's refer to the anti-gays sentiments at a societal level. I dont think it's fair to call someone bullshitting without doing a thorough research on this area.

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/prej_defn.html

[b]Heterosexism Around the same time, heterosexism began to be used as a term analogous to sexism and racism, describing an ideological system that denies, denigrates, and stigmatizes any nonheterosexual form of behavior, identity, relationship, or community (Herek, 1990). Using the term heterosexism highlights the parallels between antigay sentiment and other forms of prejudice, such as racism, antisemitism, and sexism.
Like institutional racism and sexism, heterosexism pervades societal customs and institutions. It operates through a dual process of invisibility and attack. Homosexuality usually remains culturally invisible; when people who engage in homosexual behavior or who are identified as homosexual become visible, they are subject to attack by society.

Examples of heterosexism in the United States include the continuing ban against lesbian and gay military personnel; widespread lack of legal protection from antigay discrimination in employment, housing, and services; hostility to lesbian and gay committed relationships, recently dramatized by passage of federal and state laws against same-gender marriage; and the existence of sodomy laws in more than one-third of the states.

Although usage of the two words has not been uniform, homophobia has typically been employed to describe individual antigay attitudes and behaviors whereas heterosexism has referred to societal-level ideologies and patterns of institutionalized oppression of non-heterosexual people.

And she did not psychoanalyse you.. Psychoanalysis is a field in Psychology found by Freud.. I will talk about it a little bit later..

But then, there are scientific studies to suggest that homophobic males do react sexually when they are exposed to pictures of male genitals.. Twisted Evil Mr. Green
http://www.oogachaga.com/downloads/homophobia_and_homosexual_arousal.pdf[/b]

No, certainly the word HETEROSEXISM existed before [email protected] and certainly before earthlings came into this World.

Unfortunately, my response was to correct [email protected] s wonderful attempt to B.S. with his part definition of the word HETEROSEXISM which is repeated as follow :

HETEROSEXISM is...
......It's the idea that lesbian, gay and bisexual people are demanding "special status" when they ask for basic civil rights......

Compare this part definition from [email protected] to yours, it certainly make more B.S. out of a small mole hill to justify basic civil rights for Gays.

Incidentally, it seems that despite the Gays being empathized and accepted by the majority of Singaporeans, and with their unusual attitudes and life style being tolerated and accommodated even by the Government, it seems that given a MILIMETER, you the Gays are now pushing to have a whole KILOMETER .

Atobe SG

Originally posted by earthlings73:
Ah.. Finally you understood that AIDS is not a gay problem.. In the article that I've quoted, there are even earlier cases than the HIV epidemic happened in US in the 1980s.. And there you go, lesbians will have less chance to contact HIV because there's no penetration.. So r u going to argue you can accept lesbians more than straights?

As for your second point, I do agree with you to a certain degree.. We know that 30% of HIV patients are gays.. which should be higher than the population base rate of 10% (estimation).. But then, what drives such promiscuity in the gay comm? Isnt it related back to:

1) marriage
2) housing

When straights decide to settle down, what would they do? Get married.
And what's the first thing in their agenda? Housing. It's pretty sad in the gay comm that a relationship seems to be in a perpetual courtship without the chance of settling down..

However, all these need to wait.. the society can't change overnight.. But then, to address this issue.. it must be confronted head on.. to educate the gay comm about the risk of sexual transmitted disease instead of just empty talk.. =p

In fact, I've just signed up for Action for Aids.. To help them out to spreading the importance of prevention.. =p I believe all of us can make a difference to the society..

In the current Twenty-First Century, AIDS is certainly not exclusively a GAY problem at the present state of the spread of this disease.

Unfortunately, it is recognized that the Gay Community is the most likely carrier and victim of this disease; while sexual promiscuity in the HETEROSEXUAL community will inflict the same disease on them.

You will have to TRY HARDER to convince the NORMAL SEXUALLY INCLINED Singaporeans that THE HOMOSEXUALS deserve to be treated much better then they ALREADY ARE .

Should a MALE be allowed to marry another MALE, or a FEMALE marrying a FEMALE ?

What is the objective of MARRIAGE ?

Was MAN created to marry another MAN, or a WOMAN created to marry another WOMAN ?

Will legal Marriage and Public Housing help to reduce the incidence of AIDS ?

At present, with AIDS being so pervasive, there is also an equal number of AIDS patients who are MARRIED to opposite sex - and obviously owning properties.

Did it prevent AIDS from those who are married to opposite sex but remain promiscuous ?

If the Gay community is granted easy access to public assisted housing (such as HDB), will the incidence of AIDS drop, or will it allow an easier environment for more homosexual activities to take place BEHIND PRIVATE DOORS ?

Are you suggesting that presently homosexual activities are already taking place in the OPEN, and NOT behind CLOSED and PRIVATE doors ?

WITH or WITHOUT PUBLIC HOUSING, and this is already causing the high incidence of AIDS amongst the Gay Community.

Atobe SG

Originally posted by earthlings73:
Wah.. I thought I've stayed rather reasonable and composed throught this discussion.. In face of all the insults hurled at me.. Without the need to resort to CAPITALISE accusations at anyone..

And now I'm being labelled as defensive.. Someone is defensive only when he or she refuse to buy in to an argument without closely examining all the evidences put forth.. However, I did spend time reading all the articles you have posted and addressed them point by point without avoiding any issues in the process..

I even supported ben's stand that the removal of homosexuality from DSM has nothing to do with whether gays are borned or not. I even cautioned iveco about the seemingly lower % of HIV patients who are gays..

Sigh.. Am very sad indeed.. With all these insults and baseless accusations

Is it not correct to claim your position to be DEFENSIVE when you take such easy and general umbrage of claiming that Homosexuality is not understood by human-kind ?

Are Gays so sensitive even if they are still 'half-a-Male' ?

Homosexuals (not including the Lesbians) amongst MALES seem to be of two different groups

those who carry physical and behavioral traits of Femininity and believe themselves to be more FEMALE then MALE - and will emotionally identify themselves to resemble and have a stronger identity as FEMALE .

there is a second group who have no physical and / or behavioral traits of Femininity and are naturally MALE in appearance, but simply have an inclination towards MALES mentally and physically attracted to MALES only.

If you belong to the first group of effeminate Males then your sensitive feeling can be accommodated quite easily. Rolling Eyes

Atobe SG

Originally posted by earthlings73:
Wah.. How did you manage to come to this conclusion while reading the website you had posted?

But thanks for highlighting this website.. =p Some excerpts from the website:

[b]Same-sex love was celebrated in Chinese art, many examples of which have survived the book burnings of the Cultural Revolution. Though no large statues are known to still exist, many hand scrolls and paintings on silk can be found in private collections[2].

In the year 1944, the scholar Sun Cizhou published a work stated that one of the most famous ancient Chinese poets, Qu Yuan, was a lover of his King. Sun cited the poetry of Qu Yuan to prove his claim. In Qu Yuan's most important work Li Sao (Sorrow of parting), Qu Yuan called himself a beautiful man (or woman, mei ren). A word he used to describe his king was used at that time by women to characterize their lovers.

Since the policy of Reform and Opening Up in 1979, the communist party has been loosening its control over this kind of behavior. But the practice of homosexuality is still libeled as a "moldering life style of capitalism".

A notable change occurred during the late 1990s and early 2000s, when sodomy was decriminalized in 1997, and the new Chinese Classification and Diagnostic Criteria of Mental Disorders removed homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses on April 20, 2001. The situation has continued to evolve in 2004. Many consider the magazine "Menbox" [3] to be a gay magazine in all but name. Recently, a transsexual woman, Chen Lili was allowed to compete in the China selection pageant for the Miss Universe competition.

An internet survey in 2000 showed that Chinese people are becoming more tolerant towards homosexuality: among the 10,792 surveyed, 48.15% were in favor, 30.9% disapproved, 14.46% were uncertain, and 7.26% were indifferent. There are no radical conservatives or radical liberation activists, so gay-bashing is rare. But some scholars complain that the government is too indifferent on this issue, doing nothing to promote the situation of homosexuality in China. During the 2002 Gay Games, only 2 persons from the mainland were sent to take part in, and apart from gay websites the media gave little coverage to the event. Many gay men admit having unsafe sex, and more than one sex partner, which worsens the spread of AIDS in China, because the Chinese government makes little effort to educate citizens about the danger of AIDS among gay people. The authorities still refuse to promote either gay issues or gay rights in China. Although there is no explicit law against homosexuality or same-sex acts between consenting adults, neither are there laws protecting gays from discrimination, nor are there any gay rights organizations in the PRC.

I do not disagree with you on certain principles:

To address the issue, you have to recognise the issue. I have posted the article about Asia-Pac's efforts to recognise the need to address that special efforts need to be targetted at the gay comm. But then, to address this, the government need to realise that there are gays in the society, which is by itself an affirmation of the existence of gays. But then, it's important to educate gays about safe sex practices.

But I disagree with you on one issue:

The position from accepting that there are gays and special efforts are needed to address the issue do not mean that they are targetting at changing their orientation.. This is a logical leap.. Nothing in the article I've read suggested such a stand at all..[/b]

As was mentioned in my post that you have quoted, the Communist Government of China had little choice but to realize that the AIDS epidemic had to be fought by getting all the HOMOSEXUALS to surface into the OPEN.

Having instituted programs to accommodate the HOMOSEXUALS, and to encourage their appearance from hiding, it does not necessarily mean that HOMOSEXUAL activities are to be encouraged and its PRACTICES to be PROMOTED.

There is a difference between "ACCOMMODATING " and "PROMOTING" .

Surely, you are NOT trying to prove my point that when a MILLIMETER is given, you want to have a WHOLE KILOMETER ?

Atobe SG

Originally posted by earthlings73:
Ah, another attempt to instill fear and homophobia, I see..

Remember the China article you had posted?

[b]Homosexuality has been documented in China since ancient times. According the scholar Ji Yun of the Qing Dynasty, already at the very beginning Huang Di (The Yellow Emperor, 2697? - 2597? BCE), legendary king and founder of the Chinese culture, had male lovers. This is naturally not very trustworthy because whether there was really a person called Huang Di is not very clear. Two notable royal examples come from a formulaic expression, yÃºtÃ¡o duÃ nxiÃ¹ (ä½æ¡æè¢). YÃºtÃ¡o, or "the leftover peach", recorded in Hanfeizi, speaks of Mi Zixia (å½åç), a beautiful youth cherished by Duke Ling of Wei (è¡éå) who once shared an already bitten but very delicious peach with the duke, who appreciated the gesture (although once the growing Mi Zixia lost his beauty, the duke looked back on this event and said Mi was being insincere [1].) DuÃ nxiÃ¹, or "breaking the sleeve", refers to Emperor Ai of Han China's act of cutting his sleeve, on which his adored male concubine Dongxian (è£è³¢) was sleeping, in order not to wake him.

Scholar Pan Guangdan (æ½åæ¦) came to the conclusion that nearly every emperor in the Han Dynasty had one or more male sex partners. There are also descriptions of lesbians in some history books. It is believed homosexuality was popular in the Song, Ming and Qing dynasties. Chinese homosexuals did not experience high-profile persecution comparing with that was received by homosexuals in Europe during the Middle Ages.

Then, China borrowed the values/morals from the West, which includes homophobia:

The first law against homosexuals in China went into effect in 1740. There was no record in the history as to how effectively the law was enforced. The more devastating thing for Chinese homosexuals was, ironically, the enlightenment that came after the Self-Strengthening Movement, when homophobia was imported to China along with Western science and philosophy.

Now China had delisted homosexuality from their list of mental disorders, and decriminalised homosexuality.. And mind you, as a communist regime, they are mindful about carefully research into such areas through scientific means before deciding on what position they should take.. Laughing China, as far as I know, is one country that will not Kow Tow to another country in the politics of the modern world.. [/b]

China had delisted homosexuality from their list of mental disorders and decriminalized homosexuality only for the purpose of combating the AIDS epidemic that will inflict more then a MILLION in their midst.

The China Government are filled with Persons who are REALISTS and PRAGMATISTS; and when the AIDS epidemic is licked, the PURITAN ideals of a HEALTHY lifestyle will surely be revived.

Another Cultural Revolution will surely straigthen some who prefer to be bent.

Atobe SG

Originally posted by earthlings73:
If both of us can't settle this arguments, let's listen to the professionals.. =p

[quote]Proponents
Various religious and ex-gay organizations, including PFOX, Exodus International, NARTH and the International Healing Foundation, as well as various minor ex-gay and transformational ministries advocate the belief that reparative therapy is genuine and works.

Conversion therapies are also advocated by various religious family values groups such as the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family.

Specific proponents, such as Charles Socarides, often have gay sons, leading some to suspect they are working out their own psychological issues in public through their advocacy of a therapy that doesn't work.

Opponents
Reparative therapies are opposed by a variety of groups, including gay rights organizations such as GLAAD, Stonewall and Outrage.

More importantly, many various professional medical and psychological bodies condemn conversion therapies. Such bodies include:

American Psychiatric Association (APA)
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Medical Association
American Psychological Association
American Counseling Association
American Federation of Teachers
National Association of School Psychologists
National Association of Social Workers
National Association of Secondary School Principals
National Education Association
Royal College of Nursing.
On the question of whether therapy can change sexual orientation the APA answers:

"No. Even though most homosexuals live successful, happy lives, some homosexual or bisexual people may seek to change their sexual orientation through therapy, sometimes pressured by the influence of family members or religious groups to try and do so. The reality is that homosexuality is not an illness. It does not require treatment and is not changeable." [4] (http://www.apa.org/pubinfo/answers.html#cantherapychange)
Some religious organisations also oppose reparative therapies, including The Interfaith Alliance, New Ways Ministries and People for the American Way.

In 1999, the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Counseling Association, American Association of School Administrators, American Federation of Teachers, American Psychological Association, American School Health Association, Interfaith Alliance Foundation, National Association of School Psychologists, National Association of Social Workers, and National Education Association developed and endorsed a statement reading:

[b]The most important fact about 'reparative therapy,' also sometimes known as 'conversion' therapy, is that it is based on an understanding of homosexuality that has been rejected by all the major health and mental health professions. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of Social Workers, together representing more than 477,000 health and mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus there is no need for a 'cure.' ...health and mental health professional organizations do not support efforts to change young people's sexual orientation through 'reparative therapy' and have raised serious concerns about its potential to do harm.[quote][/b]

Impressive effort but unfortunately self-serving.

If NORMAL MALES can succeed in practising CELIBACY - is it not possible for ABNORMAL MALES to reign in their sexual desires and needs ?

If every Male CANNOT practice SEXUAL RESTRAINT the incidences of rape and pedophilia will surely be much higher then it currently is.

If ABNORMAL SEXUAL DESIRES can be restrained or modified, is it not possible for similar restraints to be taught to HOMOSEXUALS who are inclined to be attracted to the persons from the same gender ?

Even HANDICAPS are willing to overcome their difficulties and accept help to face the challenges of the NORMAL World, which they desire to be part of.

Atobe SG

Originally posted by earthlings73:
Originally posted by Atobe:
How does some child learn to talk earlier than others, while other children continue with their babble ?

Is it due to the intelligence level of each child, or the environment and opportunities that are available to the respective children ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your statement will render the entire system of meritrocracy useless.. The Government started the scholarship program simply because they recognised that different people have different learning capacities..

And what if a person is borned mentally challenged? Will you be able to teach him so that he can earn a scholarship?

At school, we all know that there are certain people who are bright enough to do well with very minimal study.

At work, we are all aware that there are talented staff who can handle work with ease compared to the others.

Is this purely due to environment?

Btw, I've not addressed one of the "environmental theory" in the site you had posted.. Will do so later..

Was Albert Einstein a recognized genius when he was much younger ?

What about those few Singaporeans, who went through ITE, and finally made it good through University with distinctions ?

Are you passing my post at a tangent with your understanding of MERITOCRACY in the manner that you prefer to interpret the Governments intentions ?

Originally posted by earthling 73:
Quote from original post by Atobe:
Can a Left-Handed Person not be taught to use his Right Hand as well ?

Have you not heard of someone being 'AMBIDEXTROUS' - meaning the ability and skills to use both hands effectively ?

All can be achieved through teaching with patience on one side, and diligent learning from the other.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uhuh.. that's why Kinsey proposed the idea of sexual continuum:

Homosexual - Bisexual - Heterosexual..

He designed a questionnaire in the 40s with this idea that each of us fall along this continuum of sexuality.. Just they are are left-handers, ambidextrous individuals, and right handers..

Have you tried to convert yourself to left-handed before?

And with the world so right-handers bias, why would so many left handers still stick to using the left hand?

Are you trying to argue that since one can change his handedness easily, why should we care about the left-handers?

Would believe that Left-handers do not necessarily perform all tasks with their left-hand only as similarly, the Right-handers will also execute some work with their left as well.

Not all Muslims are Left-handed (or ambidextorous) , yet certain critical task must be performed with the lesser hand from the one that they will normally use to feed themselves.

Was it by training or by nature for the required tasks to be performed ?

Original post by earthling73:
Quote: Original Post by Atobe:
Every major Asian Religion believe that HOMOSEXUALISM is UN-NATURAL, and is harmful to the HOMOSEXUAL, as well as to the Community, Society and Country.

Every Asian Society bear the same attitude of indifference and unspoken tolerance - a live and let live attitude - towards the HOMOSEXUALS and the LESBIANS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah.. Another blatant sweeping statement without clear justifications.. A concrete proof that you did not read the article I've posted about Dalai Lama's position in Homosexuality:

Dalai Lama urges 'respect, compassion, and full human rights for all,' including gays

http://quietmountain.org/links/teachings/gayrites.htm

Simply have to wonder about your sweeping and judgmental statement that is based on such weak foundation.

Surely, one Dalai Lama who require as much political support for his present weak political position is NOT the concrete proof that can justify your position for your need for understanding and acceptance to your Community.

BTW, the Dalai Lama only urges RESPECT, COMPASSION and FULL HUMAN RIGHTS for ALL not necessarily including Gays, did you add this piece or was the clarification by him.

Surely, you will not take this urging from the Dalai Lama to be APPROVAL for your kind of HOMOSEXUAL URGE ? Laughing

Are you so desperate as to bring in the Dalai Lama, and only to misquote him ?
Rolling Eyes

Atobe SG

Originally posted by earthlings73:
More on Asian Religions' views on Homosexuality:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality

[b]Buddhism
One of the five precepts of Buddhism states that one is to refrain from sexual misconduct or, more accurately, one is to refrain from indulging in sexual desire. Most Buddhist schools construe this to mean that monks and nuns are to practice celibacy. However, there has been a diversity of opinions on this matter ranging from strict vows of celibacy to Japanese Buddhist schools that taught heterosexuality was to be avoided for clergy.

For laypersons today, this precept mainly applies to adultery. However, wide ranges of interpretations are possible about what exactly constitutes "sexual misconduct" and therefore the different schools of Buddhism - or even different individual monks - at different periods of time have offered varying opinions.

Interpretations of what constitutes misconduct include sex outside marriage (relatively modern idea), sex with another person without the consent of your life partner(s), or the historically prevalent view that it was limited to describe rape, incest and bestiality.

Buddhist schools condemning homosexuality is a recent development and there is no scriptural basis upon which it is to be condemned. Prior to colonialism under Abrahamic countries homosexuality was sanctified by Buddhist leaders throughout Asia.

Different countries held various views, for example in China where believers often belong to Confucianism as well, exclusive homosexuality was discouraged because it would prevent a son from carrying out his Confucian religious duty to reproduce, all at the same time non-exclusive homosexuality was permissible and widely practiced. Monogamy was an unsual and foreign idea to many Asians until contact with the West.

Within Japanese traditions homosexuality was said to have been started by the Bodhisattva Manjusri of wisdom and the sage Kukai while in China it is attributed to the Yellow Emperor, the father of China.

In India, Tibet, China, Southeast Asia and Japan, areas where Buddhism was or remains one of the chief religions their cultures have been historically unconcerned with the gender of sexual activity or the object of desire.

Taoism

Homosexuality is not forbidden by the Taoist Holy Books (the Tao Te Ching and the Zhuang Zi). However, many Taoists believe that exclusive homosexuality is wrong, but many others see nothing wrong with it.

To understand why this is, one must understand Taoism's intertwined status with Confucianism and Buddhism in many adherents. A great many Taoists combine Confucian thought that requires sons to further the family lineage by reproduction.

Both Taoism and Buddhism do not forbid exclusive homosexuality but Confucianism did by insisting that a sons religious duty included reproduction to further the family lineage. Taoists who find nothing wrong with exclusive homosexuality usually do not believe in Confucianism or have dropped their requirement of heterosexual relations due to medicinal advancements that allow reproduction without such sex, using IVF and/or surrogacy.

This has been the traditional view of homosexuality in Taoism, that homosexual acts in it self are not wrong but all men are still required to reproduce. For example, Taoists may have homosexual relations as long as they continue the family tree by having a child with at least one woman.

Hinduism

Monk performing auparashtika on a visiting prince. Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh.Main article: Homosexuality and Hinduism

The Indian Kama Sutra written in the third century CE contains passages describing hijras performing oral sex to men with tips to maximize pleasure. Prior to British colonization of India hijras were not the only homosexual activity, many engaged in a form of pederasty which was openly practiced by Muslims and Sikhs in the north while being overlooked in the south by Hindus. The terms gand-mara (anus beater), gando (ass-taker) and ganga ("anuser") were coined during this time period. During British control Hinduism became markedly antagonistic to homosexuality.

In Hinduism many divinities are androgynous with some changing sex to participate in homoerotic behavior.[/b]

It seems that you prefer to extract features of the various religions to enhance the correctness and therefore the legitimacy of HOMESEXUALISM.

Try as much as you like, it still remain that there is no POLITICS in this topic of HOMOSEXUALISM - as every posting that you have made concerns topics of SEX, SEXUALISM, HOMOSEXUAL TOPICS, HOMOSEXUAL ACTs, HOMOSEXUAL Values, Lifestyles, Attitudes, and Preferences - nothing of which concerns POLITICS.

You may wish to pay attention to this part of the Hinduism :

Hinduism and Homosexuality :

Regarding the Hindu scriptural views on homosexuality:
The first and foremost injunction in the Bhagavad Gita is that all of us
are individual souls who are eternal.

Thus, we are not our bodies. To actually come to this realization, we must act in accordance to our true nature i.e. spirit souls.

Therefore, any action that is based on gratifying the senses of this temporary body will drag us further into the
illusion that we are this body.

We have nothing against people relating to other people of the same gender
as long as the relationship is based on spiritual advancement and not on
sense gratification.

Even male-female relations should not be based on sense gratification but self-realization.

The act of intercourse is to beperformed only for the procreation of children who will be raised in a God conscious environment and it is not to be done otherwise i.e for sense gratification.

Illicit sex is strictly prohibited and sex is allowed within marriage only for the procreation of God conscious children.

These basic facts have been watered down by many of the so-called Hindus and very few actually practice these principles because the essence of
spiritual pleasure has been lost.

Homosexual or even heterosexual pleasure has no real place in the life of
the serious practitioner of self realization and God consciousness.

This will just be another impediment in ones spiritual life.

http://www.hindunet.org/alt_hindu/1995_May_1/msg00006.html

The Srimad Bhagavatam Debate
Within the Srimad Bhagavatam there are a few lines (Canto 3, Ch.20 Text 23, 24 & 26) that describes Brahma's creation of a group of demons that became obsessed with sex and demanded sex from him, but then he became frightened and ran away from them.

Opponents of homosexuality believe this proves that homosexual behaviour is lustful and evil.

Proponents of homosexuality argue that the demons were the children of Brahma, and that this story teaches that incest is lustful and evil (compare to the story of Shatarupa).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_views_of_homosexuality#The_Srimad_Bhagavatam_Debate

Homosexuality and Theravada Buddhism
Homosexuality was known in ancient India; it is explicitly mentioned in the Vinaya (monastic discipline) and prohibited.

It is not singled out for special condemnation, but rather simply mentioned along with a wide range of other sexual behaviour as contravening the rule that requires monks and nuns to be celibate.

Sexual behaviour, whether with a member of the same or the opposite sex, where the sexual organ enters any of the bodily orifices (vagina, mouth or anus), is punishable by expulsion from the monastic order.

Other sexual behaviour like mutual masturbation or interfemural sex, while considered a serious offense, does not entail expulsion but must be confessed before the monastic community.

http://www.buddhanet.net/homosexu.htm

Atobe SG

Originally posted by Earthling73:
Originally posted by pikamaster:
hmmm... read teh criticisms of Kohlberg's Theory yet?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yup.. Pro-left rather than Pro-right..
But we have not seen another alternative theory from the field of Psychology yet..

Kohlbergs piece provide a new direction of psychological understanding of the MIND, and has its weaknesses and hang-ups too, but it provides the basis to look at things from a different perspective.

How does Kohlbergs piece help to advance your position in defending Gays demand to their Right to bigger space then what has already been open so far and only up to the point of marriage between adults of the same sex ?

Morality certainly can develop outside religion, and it is the Morality of a Community that determine the Religious interpretation of Moral Standards.

Is it not MAN that create RELIGION to satisfy his search for an answer to fill up his inadequacy in all spheres of understanding his EXISTENCE and LIFE ?

Criticisms of Kohlberg
Measurement Criticisms
There have been many criticisms of Kohlberg's theory of moral development and his methods.

The first criticizes his means of measuring levels of moral reasoning.

Some critics claim that the use of hypothetical situations skews the results because it measures abstract rather than concrete reasoning.

When children (and some adults) are presented with situations out of their immediate experience, they turn to rules they have learned from external authorities for answers, rather than to their own internal voice.

Therefore, young children base their answers on rules of "right" and "wrong" they have learned from parents and teachers (Stages 1 and 2 according to Kohlberg's theory).

If young children are presented with situations familiar to them, on the other hand, they often show care and concern for others, basing their moral choices on the desire to share the good and maintain harmonious relations, placing them in Stage 3 or 4 (which Kohlberg claimed was impossible at their age).

Therefore, the criticism is that his measuring tool is faulty - people actually operate differently in real life situations.

The next criticism is based on the "social desirability" bias that confounds hypothetical based research questions.

Kohlberg's emphasis on abstract reasoning in his research creates confounds in which habitual juvenile delinquents can score at a higher stage of moral development than well-behaved children.

Because behaviors are not considered and reasoning is determined through hypothetical situations, children who behave in immoral ways may be able to answer hypothetical moral dilemmas in a more advanced fashion than better-behaved children who think less abstractly.

Early criticisms of Kohlberg's lack of attention to behaviors led Kohlberg to add an emphasis on moral action to his Just Community educational program.

For those who are looking for concrete help in developing moral values in children, however, Kohlberg's theory is still of little practical use.

"Universality" criticisms and Gender criticisms
The next criticims attack Kohlberg's claim that his stages of moral development are universal, applying equally to all human beings (and genders) across cultural divisions.

Carol Gilligan was the first to attack this aspect of Kohlberg's theory, pointing out that there were difference between men and women in how they reasoned morally.

Gilligan pointed out that all of Kohlberg's original subjects were male, as was Kohlberg himself, and that they therefore failed to place a high value on the morality of care, sacrifice and community. (All excellent point!)

Western Bias Criticism
Another criticism pointed out that Kohlberg, as a member of the educated, elite, white, male, Western culture, viewed individual autonomy and justice as the premier moral values.

He even went so far as to equate morality with justice (ignoring other moral values such as courage, self-control, empathy, etc.).

Members of the working and rural classes, however, tend to have a more communitarian approach to life, viewing the common good as the highest value, promoting care and harmonious relationships over individual justice. (Women, having been relegated to "lower class" status for centuries, may have developed a more communitarian approach to life for that reason, rather than simply because they are female.)

Non-Western and tribal societies also frequently see the community as more important than the individual.

"Individualistic" Criticisms
According to Kohlberg's upper-class Western view of moral reasoning, communitarian morality is doomed to rest forever at a lower stage of development (Stages 3 and 4).

This view disregards the possibility that communitarian morality may be as advanced as individualistic morality, if not more so.

It also can be seen to place Western culture at the top of the scale, with little room for cross-cultural inclusion, although Buddhist philosophy and Taoism can be viewed as postconventional.

Although Kohlberg insisted that his theory was culturally inclusive, he found little empirical evidence to back this up.

In all of his interviews, only a few people showed Stage 5 reasoning, and nearly all were well-educated Westerners.

Stage 6 reasoning was never substantiated in interviews; Kohlberg created it as an "ideal" and pointed to examples such as Gandhi to support its existence.

After a tremendous amount of criticism over the fact that Stage 6 was purely hypothetical, Kohlberg removed it from the empirical stages but retained it as a "theoretical construct in the realm of philosophical speculation."

Despite equally heavy criticism, Kohlberg refused to remove Stage 5 from his system.

http://www.candleinthedark.com/kohlberg.html

Atobe SG

Originally posted by [email protected]:
Originally quoted from post by Atobe:
Should offer you some credit for effort, but still - your effort fall miserably flat in your false attempt in defining HETEROSEXISM.

There is no PART DEFINITION of the word HETEROSEXISM, this word has a simple and "STRAIGHT" meaning (no pun intended) :

heterosexual, adj
1. Having a sexual attraction to people of the opposite sex.
2. Said of a relationship: between a man and a woman.

noun
1. A heterosexual person. Sometimes shortened to het, hetero.

Derivative: heterosexuality
noun
http://www.allwords.com/query.php?SearchType=3&Keyword=heterosexual&goquery=Find+it!&Language=ENG
I see u have difficulty differentiating between heteroSEXUALITY and heteroSEXISM. What u just attempted to say is akin to saying that race and racism mean the same thing.

Why is it that the 'against' people like u and PRP keep making the same sort of defination mistakes? It'd be really funny if it wasn't such a hinderance to a proper debate.

Why all the B.S. of "PART DEFINITION" as given by you ?

BTW thanks for your attempt to psychoanalyse my sexual intensity, but I am quite happy - not disturbed - with my PASSIONATE INDULGENCE IN HETEROSEXUALISM; and the OPPOSITE SEX have not found any reason to complain - so far.

Besides being queer - are homosexuals rude as well ?

Are you trying to be fanciful in burying your reply into my piece that you have quoted - (that part of your post that is colored in Red by me) ?

Why do you even bother to reply to my post if you cannot post your reply in a more appropriate position ?

Is your preferred manner helping or hindering a proper debate that you wish has less hindrance ?

Your part definition of :

HETEROSEXISM is...
......It's the idea that lesbian, gay and bisexual people are demanding "special status" when they ask for basic civil rights......

Your part definition is quite different from your current position that attempt to differentiate heteroSEXUALITY and heterosexism, which you are now trying to mix between RACE and RACISM.

In the first place, do you actually understand the terminology of SEXUALITY and SEXISM before you even attempt to begin a discussion about RACE and RACISM ? Rolling Eyes

Atobe SG

Originally posted by [email protected]:
a politician having sex, doesn't politicise the act of sex. A politician whose been found out having sex with the inappropriate person, THAT becomes politicised. if my linkage of sex n politics seems somewate desparate, how come that happens all too often in politics?

For your information, when a POLITICIAN is found out having sex in an inappropriate place, with an inappropriate person that becomes a SCANDAL there is NO POLITICS in the SEXUAL BEHAVIOR itself.

POLITICS will be involved when DR M MAHATIR utilize ANWAR IBRAHIMs homosexual tendencies as an excuse to get rid of ANWAR from ever becoming a Prime Minister of Malaysia (imagine how many straight guys will be saved from being bent serving Anwar) Laughing

If Dr M Mahatir DID NOT wish to get rid of Anwar, will Anwars personal sexual preferences be a political factor ?

Atobe SG

Originally posted by [email protected]:
Originally posted by boy in blues:
gayism has no purpose in procreation.
it is a useless indulgence in unorthodox sex for the sheer heck of it with no constructive motive.
if every human practiced it, we'd be extinct before mountain gorillas go.
at least they're smarter
-----------------------------------------------------------------
the one OBVIOUS FLAW with this silly supposition is that, IT WON'T HAPPEN. Now shut up about a silly "IF", and pray tell what harm is there to the entire species in having some humans who are homosexual. giant gorillas survived as a species despite almost 90% homosexuality amongst the species, until humans came and messed with them anyways. Danger of extinction due to humans, not due to homosexuality.

If every HUMAN on earth practices HOMOSEXUALITY how will procreation take place ?

Surely it does not take too much intelligence to figure this out ?

Are HOMOSEXUALS poorly adjusted HUMANS, who simply cannot accept or unable to adjust into a role in LIFEs continued procreation ? Rolling Eyes

Atobe SG

Originally posted by [email protected]:
Quoted from post by Atobe:
"HOMOSEXUALITY has nothing to do with SEX itself" .... but "means liking or loving someone of the same gender" - if HOMOSEXUALITY is not about SEX, where do you think "LIKING" and "LOVING" someone will lead you to ?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not fair to label attraction to someone of a same gender as a sex act itself just because it leads to sex. If thats they way u think then when u talk about heterosexuality and homosexuality thats akin to comparing apples with bloody DURIANS

Did I mention that attraction to someone of a same gender as a sex act ?

I thought I quoted from your earlier post that said HOMOSEXUALITY means LIKING or LOVING someone of the same gender I suppose you will want to define the various stages of LIKING and LOVING ?

My post had simply asked where do YOU think LIKING and LOVING will lead you to ?

Is it not about SEX - (in all its variances, nuances, meanings) - when we refer to the reference subjects of HETEROSEXUALITY and HOMOSEXUALITY ?

Is SEX not the common factor in both these subjects ?

Perhaps you exagerate a little by comparing the topics as being a comparison of apples and durians ?

It will be more correct if you had said it is a comparison of apples that are naturally grown and apples that are Genetically Modified. Laughing

Atobe SG

Originally posted by [email protected]:
Quoted from post by Atobe:
Surely you intend to mean that HOMOSEXUALITY does not ONLY refer to homosexual acts ?

But, then again - it MUST BE, as it is the basis of the word itself.

To prevent inaccuracies in interpreting and wrongly understanding of the word "HOMOSEXUALITY " - why not simply refer to the on-line dictionary from Merriam-Webster ?

SEXUALITY itself means :
Main Entry: sex·u·al·i·ty
Pronunciation: "sek-sh&-'wa-l&-tE
Function: noun
: the quality or state of being sexual : a : the condition of having sex b : sexual activity c : expression of sexual receptivity or interest especially when excessive

HOMOSEXUALITY means :
Main Entry: ho·mo·sex·u·al·i·ty
Pronunciation: "hO-m&-"sek-sh&-'wa-l&-tE
Function: noun
1 : the quality or state of being homosexual
2 : erotic activity with another of the same sex

HOMOSEXUAL means :
Main Entry: 1ho·mo·sex·u·al
Pronunciation: "hO-m&-'sek-sh(&-)w&l, -'sek-sh&l
Function: adjective
1 : of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex
2 : of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex
- ho·mo·sex·u·al·ly adverb

http://www.m-w.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
if thats the case please define heterosexuality then. We're talking about gender preference here, not sexual acts themselves. IF u would like to use another term, we shall use 'gay' and 'straight' to avoid confusion then? We're talking about homosexuals here with a reference to the 'person'.

Then I suppose if i said a sentence: "You are heterosexual"

Am I saying u are straight or am I saying u are of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the oppo sex, or of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex? Pray tell.

MAKE IT CLEAR HERE. We are using the terms "HOMOSEXUAL" and "HETEROSEXUAL" as NOUNS. If u continue to want to refer to them as an adjective instead of a noun, then don't bother debating here because u're obviously playing on words instead of with logic

Why not let us both MAKE IT CLEAR HERE ?

From the on-line dictionary, the words HOMOSEXUAL and HETERSEXUAL are adjectives; while the words HOMOSEXUALITY and HETEROSEXUALITY are NOUNS - - UNLESS this on-line dictionary is bent too (?)

Which words do you prefer to use to make any sense in your defense of HOMOSEXUALITY ?

Atobe SG

Most major religions TODAY are influenced by the SOCIAL and CULTURAL VALUES of the largely NORMAL Lay Community, and with these values not exactly encouraging the values of the Gay community.

Religious interpretations change with TIME, just as HUMAN KIND change with TIME, social, cultural, religious, political and economic values all change with TIME.

It is unfortunate that some religions do more harm to Human Kind then they actually realised, but it is Theology not Sexology that require monks and nuns to be celibate.

Unfortunately, can your confused mind have the ability to fathom such philosophical challenges, when you believe that I am a such a heterosexist and yet will expect me to be a "MCP merely to oppress women" ?

Would it not be correct that a heterosexist should be more endearing to women and serve their needs better ?

Atobe SG

Originally posted by ahpeh:
Hmm.... im lost..

well anyways, atobe ur claim that homosexuality is "unnatural" is somewhat contradictory to the fact that gays have been in existence since the dawn of time.

Let me explain,

Homosexuality has been around for a long time, even Alexander was at least speculated to be bisexual. But anyways, lets look at this biologically, lets say there is a gay gene, and since gays cant procreate, and most dont try to make a baby, then it would be very likely that this"gay gene" would be transferred to lesser people and so on so forth. But somehow, even through countless of centuries of not having children of thier own, gays continue to exist.

Is it so difficult to understand ?

The birth of Gays are not created by HOMOSEXUAL acts surely you can understand that this is a certainty ?

If you ask the question : How do Gays come into being ? then perhaps you should go back a few pages, and click on all those reference sites that have been so diligently researched and attached by earthling73 and me.

:
That is, if your definition of something natural is something inborn. But you see, even is the gene is heredity and sometimes only manifesting itself in some, then would the existence of the gene itself prove a point in the first place?

What im saying is that, homosexuality is a natural phenomenon, albeit not a very common one. Its like your talents within the community, u cant argue that champion swimmers arent natural can you? (Ok i know the comparison puts just make gays look good).

Surely, champion swimmer will need to be trained and taught the correct techniques so as to refine the signature characteristics that will surely make a champion.

Is homosexuality a natural phenomenon by your interpretation: a characteristic that is ASSIGNED at natural birth ?

Surely, there are many handicap babies, or conjoint twins, or abnormal babies born with more then two arms and two legs or even with two heads.

Medical science can help some of these babies with physical or genetic defects AND it will also require the babies to make adjustments to overcome their handicaps in their growing up process.

If the baby insist on living with his handicap, and growing up to demand his Rights from Society to accommodate the handicaps, who do you think will end up being the loser ?

If a nation is filled with a majority of handicap people, it will be in the common interest of all the handicaps to have the laws change to accommodate themselves as after all the value system is based entirely on that of the handicap people.

However, if a nation is filled with a majority of NORMAL people, it will depend on the sense of charity, and the social, cultural, religious, political and economic values that are inculcated all combined to help the minority who are handicapped.

:
Homosexuality happens, it has been happening since ancient times, it has been happening between other animals, and i don't see why people are still arguing that it is against nature.

But then again, if you look at our biological strucure, you could say that homosexual act is not natural in that sense. But think again,our bodies weren't made for just typing in front of the computer on an online forum, neither was our body specifically made for jumping high up.Yet you still see people doing that. Wouldnt that be unnatural? Wouldnt doing anything and everything be unnatural then. Even sex with just the aim for pleasure is unnatural.But with that, you are just saying that the act is unnatural.

What are you truly trying to say in your very confused state of mind (colored in Red) .

Are you agreeing that homosexual sex between same sex is UN-NATURAL ?

We are certainly NOT born simply to be typing in front of the computer on an online forum but our MINDS are born to think and be critical in any discussion that now happen to be on an online forum, and typing happen to be the media of communication unless you find another method that is far more convenient to tell me of your thoughts and the processes that made it.

Certainly, our bodies are not specifically made for jumping high up, but with training can perform high jumps.

With diligent training and patient instructors, our bodies can take on the challenges of not only jumping up high, but also jumping from a plane 1000 feet up in the sky.

Is it 'NATURAL' for some foolish HUMANS to take risks in unsecured MOUNTAIN CLIMBING, or high speed Ski-jumping, or deep sea scuba diving, instead of simply doing the 'UN-NATURAL' by sitting safely in front of PC and debating useless hours on an online forum ?

What is NATURAL or UN-NATURAL depends on the Community, or Society, or Peer Groups that combined together will create social, cultural, religious, political and economic values that give some semblance of NATURAL SANITY in our LIVES.

To some, sex all day and night, for the sheer purpose of pleasure is NATURAL and why not ?

It depends on the value system that governs them, and as long as their behaviors do not impinge the values of that from the Larger Community.

:
The thing is, to actually see whether certain parts brain is supposed to only function for heterosexual people and different ones for homosexuals. Till now, i donh't think theres any difference, and that is probably why they removed it from the list of mental conditions in the first place.

Nature does not mean common, if it was like that, then according to nature, we would all be born looking alike, with the same temprements and the same intellect.

And according to you, we should all just be savages, with no clothes, with our asses running wild and free.

Try the psychiatrist studies on Homosexuals and Heterosexuals, or perhaps better still - volunteer yourself as a subject for futher studies :

Treatment of Homosexuality in Britain since the 1950s
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/bmj;328/7437/429

How did you come to understand that "NATURE does not mean common" and how does it relate to the fact that "we should all just be savages, with no clothes, with our asses running wild and free" ?

How does both relate in your very confused mind ?

No wonder you started with : "Hmm.... im lost.. " - you lost me too in your confused state of mind, making such a confusing post.

ahpeh SG

Ok, maybe i didnt express myself clearly enough. What i was trying to say in that post was that homosexuality is not unnatural, as you may claim, it is uncommon but it is nothing more than a natural variant.

On the issues whether homosexuality is inborn, im still sitting on the fence on that. Howver, i do believe that there is certain genes that do cause homosexuality, maybe not directly.

And as far as getting to public accomodate gays, i don't thinks thats true. Gays aren't asking for special status in the community, they are simply asking to the very same rights everyone else have. Marriage does not just encompasses wills, but also many other issues, like visitation rights, tax cuts and adoption. I don't see why gays are being shortchanged on this when they pay the same taxes like everone else.

boy in blues SG

Originally posted by earthlings73:

Just a note to say that anal sex is not practice only by homosexuals.

http://www.analsexyes.com/statistics.shtml

[b]In the United States, more and more heterosexuals are trying anal sex. Statistics vary, but it looks like about a quarter of adults have tried it at least once. A smaller number do it on a regular basis, perhaps 5-10 percent.

Studies done on heterosexual anal sex practices in North America
Source: UCSF's HIV InSite

3,432 adults in US 25% had at least experimented with anal sex at one point in their lives.
10% have done so at least once in the previous year.
Among women 25-29, 12% had engaged in anal intercourse in the last year and 2.4% during their last sexual event

593 students at a Midwestern University 17% of sexually experienced males and 18% of sexually experienced females had engaged in heterosexual anal intercourse
of these, 69% of males and 49% of females, respectively, did so in the previous year, 26% and 17% within the past month

household probability sample of 3,545 CA adults 8% of males and 6% females reported having anal sex at least once a month during the last year
Most of them 1 to 5 times/month
60% without ever using condoms (16% "always") for anal sex
Those who have anal sex are more likely to have other AIDS and STD risk behaviors

1,071 women 6.1% of females ages 18-49 reported having anal intercourse within the previous 6 months
17% of these reported anal intercourse more frequently than once a month

3,400 undergraduates at the University of Maryland
25% reported having practiced heterosexual anal intercourse
5514 first year college and univ. students in Canada Among the 21.3% of the men and 8.6% of the women with 10 or more partners, anal intercourse was practiced by 26.9% of the men and 34.8% of the women, and previous STD was reported by 10.6% and 24.2%, respectively.
Random telephone survey of 422 Whites and 179 African Americans in Seattle 4% of White and 7% of African-American women reported practicing anal sex during "a typical 4 week period" with their most recent sex partner.

Interestingly enough, though, anal sex appears to be much more prevalent in Latin America, especially in Brazil, where 60 percent of people report having tried it. Though apparently it is less common in the UK than the US.

Studies done on heterosexual anal sex practices in Latin America
Source: UCSF's HIV InSite

2408 Puerto Rican College Students 44% of sexually active males and 32% of females reported practicing anal sex.
12% of men said they practiced anal sex for their partner's pleasure compared to 56% of the women.

2314 MSM in Mexico City Of 555 self-identified bisexual men (21% of whom tested HIV-positive), 8% reported practicing anal intercourse either "always/almost always" or "half the time" with their female partners.
105 high risk MSM & sex workers and 155 low risk blood donors in Rio de Janeiro Over 50% of both groups (60% of the total) reported practicing anal sex.

Apparently, heterosexuals are having sex not just for the sake of procreation alone...[/b]

what a mouthful!

whatever alternative sex between hetrosexuals is justifiable as foreplay ultimately to facilitate procreation Mr. Green

« Previous Page Next Page »