Yes, one is a choice/option and the other isn’t. Such deep philosophical stuff.
1 Like
So are you suggesting that our sexuality is as changeable as our political opinions, or that our political opinions are as fixed and genetically underpinned as our sexuality?
No, obviously.
Sorry, no. Nice people are not nasty people who chose to do nice things. As, you know, they wouldn’t.
We’re here again. Seemingly the only thing we’re hard wired to is sexuality. Odd that as a mate of mine was very gay when I met him, he’s now married to a lovely lady with 2 kids and very happy. But just another irrelevant factual example from me.
Is this simply the kick back to the ludicrous conversion therapy and the notion that people can just decide not to be gay?
Let’s try to move this forward. Can you identify an aspect of a person’s personality which is as hard wired as sexuality. In your opinion. Thanks. Same to @Mascot
1 Like
As above.
Nasty/nice (or good/bad) is a spectrum not a dichotomy.
Sexuality is not a personality trait.
I’ll let @Mascot take over though he’ll likely be repeating what many have explained to you already
It’s an aspect of a person’t identity which is by definition part of their personality.
I remember the origin of this now. Why is a person’t sexuality protected and a person’s moral compass isn’t?
1 Like
Flat earthers explain things.
You mean he is bisexual and you assumed that he was gay because he was with another bloke at the time. That’s a reasonable assumption but it doesn’t necessarily mean that his sexuality has changed.
5 Likes
Fixed. They don’t explain a single jot.
This makes no sense. What is your actual point? That sexuality is not fixed? Or that personality doesn’t evolve over time? You’re conflating totally different things.
Protected from what?
Which would be true if it were true. He just literally had a change of heart. He certainly wasn’t bi when I met him and he certainly isn’t now. How do I know this? We were working at a wedding (as you do) in the summer. We were both eying up the arriving guests. He was trying to convince me of which guys were the hottest. Me the opposite. We had a good laugh about it as we couldn’t agree for a gold clock.
1 Like
He should have a word with Phillip Schofield
1 Like
Criticism.
Try to replace a word used recently on this forum into this statement.
Right wing cunts
Get it?
Why dig this up again? We’ve done it, disagreed and moved on. It’s like asking why we’ve not signed Quaresma yet.
Mine and your definition of ‘personality’ are very different then. Personality to me relates to our thoughts, behaviours and emotions, so sexuality by itself doesn’t influence personality.
Now IMO queerness (I don’t know if that’s the right term but I’m going with it!) is different and is part of personality. But IMO queerness is strongly influenced by the homosexual community’s struggle against societal discrimination and bigotry. It is almost as if homosexuals have to carve out their own identity in society because they don’t conform to societal norms.
I’m sure there are studies that show homosexuals on average are more extraverted and open than heterosexuals. Whether that is due to their changed behaviour from pressures on society? Perhaps there’s a selection bias where introverted homosexuals tend to not want to take part in studies and are less open about their sexuality.
I would actually be interested on reading up on this side of it -the behaviours associated with ‘queerness’ (again, my term) .
1 Like
Nope, I haven’t the faintest notion what you’re on about.
If your original question was asking why sexuality can’t be criticised but morals can (?)… well that’s because sexuality isn’t a choice, whereas being a bigot is.
1 Like
It’s an ‘or’ question. Just cos’ I wanted to understand you fully.
Do you believe that sexuality is like your political beliefs - changeable and down to personal choice?
Or do you believe political beliefs are like sexuality - down to biology and not something that can be changed
Remind me who loses the discussion? Ah, they who hurls the first insult.