Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rick Julian who wrote (31100)	2/17/1999 10:55:00 PM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

For starters, homosexuality in itself is not an addiction, and is not damaging. The damage is done in the reaction of society to the person who is different from the majority. You use the guise of knowledgeable, psychologically-based jargon, but are comparing apples to oranges, or worse. You seem to be terribly mixed up about the differences between having a particular sexual identity, and all the collateral damage that often happens as the result of being ridiculed, rejected by your family and society, and not allowed to have a normal life of any sort. Your belief that homosexuality is a dysfunction certainly does take you outside of the realm of contemporary understanding of mental health professionals. Are you aware that homosexuality is no longer classified as a mental illness? Can you explain to me the rationale for poor little Heather to be teased unmercifully simply because she has a lesbian mother, who may well be providing a home environment that is loving and healthy for her child? Alcoholism and drug addiction, unlike homosexuality, are treatable illnesses.

To: Rick Julian who wrote (31100)	2/17/1999 11:41:00 PM
From: Ilaine	Respond to of 108807

>>>>>My belief that homosexuality is a dysfunction doesn't make me a bigot<<<<< Well, what if you are wrong? What if it's not just a matter of opinion, but a matter of fact? If you persist in believing something which is factually inaccurate, are you going to defend yourself by saying you are entitled to your opinions, even if they are factually inaccurate? If so, if you were bigoted, how could we tell the difference?

To: Rick Julian who wrote (31100)	2/18/1999 10:28:00 AM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

<My belief that homosexuality is a dysfunction doesn't make me a bigot > My desktop dictionary defines dysfunction this way: incomplete or impaired functioning of a body part or organ. We've agreed that on average male gays probably use their sexual apparatuses (apparati?) more than male heteros, and I imagine that lesbians use theirs about as often as hetero women. You can argue that their sexual activity doesn't produce offspring, but surely you wouldn't want to go down a path that requires you to describe the sex lives of all individuals whose sex doesn't produce offspring as 'dysfunctional'? That of condom-users? Of oral sex aficionados? Of post menopausal women? Of sex toy fans? Of pregnant women? I think sexual dysfunction would be if they couldn't come, not if they decided not to procreate, or couldn't. That would be called reproductive dysfunction, I think. Of course there are those who believe that sex is, or should be, only used for reproduction, but I don't believe you are among them, are you? If you look at the organism as the mass of humanity, you could argue that given overpopulation, the reproductive 'dysfunction' is to keep having sex that makes new babies. You could look at a woman with five children she can't support or care for adequately but who keeps on getting pregnant as reproductively dysfunctional. Or, if you insist, as sexually dysfunctional. In fact, on an overpopulated planet, who's to say it isn't the gays who are functioning well and the straights who are playing Russian roulette?