[ SECRET POST #2708 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2708 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Degrassi Junior High/Degrassi High and Saved By The Bell]


__________________________________________________



03.
[The Cinema Snob]

__________________________________________________



04.
[Phil Robertson from Duck Dynasty]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Silicon Valley]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Xavier Dolan]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Pacific Rim]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Sailor Moon]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Iwan Rheon]


__________________________________________________



10.
[Love Stage!!]


__________________________________________________



11.
[The Losers (movie)]


__________________________________________________



12.
[K-pop]










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 052 secrets from Secret Submission Post #387.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[diet_poison]

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I'll be blunt: that's ridiculous.

It basically undermines the entire definition of sexual attraction.

I certainly did not choose. I'm a straight gal, and when I was a kid I was going through this huge tomboy phase where I was adamant that boys were icky (well, they were fun to play on the jungle gym with, but the idea of a boyfriend?? ew) and I'd never kiss one or marry one or go out with one, ever. Then hormones won. So yeah, I didn't choose - it happened to me.

I've only ever seen one other person make this claim and it was really weird. They couldn't really follow through with it when pressed. Honestly, could you choose to be inherently attracted to the same gender if you tried to? If someone said "go be gay for a month" and God said "it's not a sin, I give you leave for one month to be gay, now go date someone of the same gender" could you choose to have the same level of attraction to them that you have for the opposite gender now? (this is assuming you're not gray-ace or something)

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

It basically undermines the entire definition of sexual attraction.

The definition of which I happen to personally disagree with, on religious grounds. Not that I would judge anyone else for hewing to/believing in that definition; that's not for me to judge, ultimately.

I assure you I went through puberty and had the hormones hit as well, although due to underlying congenital issues I was more concerned with trying not to be consistently horribly ill and/or bedridden, to see if there was any "there" there with wanting to jump everything of the opposite gender in sight. (I also think this is an incorrect assumption/belief of how sexuality works, but it's reinforced culturally by the media kids consume, music videos, movies, like that.)

Honestly, could you choose to be inherently attracted to the same gender if you tried to? If someone said "go be gay for a month" and God said "it's not a sin, I give you leave for one month to be gay, now go date someone of the same gender" could you choose to have the same level of attraction to them that you have for the opposite gender now?

Fair warning. You are not going to like my answer.

I think people DO make that choice, in part because they buy into the "hormones override all rational thought" theory (which is, to put it politely, bogus), and with the cultural conditioning of "anything goes" these days, they follow up on whatever odd/stray thought may wander into their heads.

(This is the part you won't like.) Said odd/stray thoughts which come from a rather more unpalatable place/mentality than just hormones, in my personal opinion.

That's a general answer to your question. I will give you a personal answer, just to follow this thought experiment through: The first thing I immediately thought of, when you suggested the "God said "it's not a sin, I give you leave for one month" bit was what happened with Ezekiel. (Ezek. 4:9-15)

But that ties back into my belief that God gives all humans free will (regardless if we're all aware of that or not). So, if God said that to me, I'd argue with Him over it! Worked for old Zeke, anyway....

[(Anonymous)]

How would you say that sexuality works?

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

Definitely not the way it's portrayed in popular culture. You likely would not be happy with my answer as to how it works, so I will just leave the discussion at that, and we can agree to disagree.

[(Anonymous)]

You've already made one post that some people won't like. Why stop there? Why not share your view, so that even if people dislike it and disagree with it, they at least have a shot at understanding it?

[(Anonymous)]

Pfff, you are already anon. Unless you know that your answer is full of shit, I don't know why you'd hesitate now.

[(Anonymous)]

You know I never realized before, but you're the third person who has said homosexuality is a choice but actually does have homosexual urges they choose not to act on.

I suppose to a bisexual, homosexuality might seem like an optional thing.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

you're the third person who has said homosexuality is a choice but actually does have homosexual urges they choose not to act on

...and you know this because how? I assure you I am heterosexual. And actually haven't ever had "homosexual urges" or even any stray/odd thoughts in that direction. But kudos to you, for trying to troll me and get an irate response. It didn't work, I'm sorry to say. Your statement above is just as ridiculous as everyone in this thread is saying my beliefs are.

[(Anonymous)]

Congratulations, you now know how homosexuality works, but in reverse. The bible also says women are to learn in silence and have no authority over men. So, you must hate female police officers and teachers and female government officials.

[a_potato]

You haven't had any homosexual urges. You haven't had any stray/odd thoughts in that direction.

Imagine forcing yourself to be homosexual. Imagine taking a member of the same sex as your spouse. Imagine having sex with them. Imagine telling yourself that you love them. Imagine raising children with them.

Now imagine that you haven't had any heterosexual urges. Imagine that you haven't had any stray/odd thoughts in that direction.

Here's the trouble: you seem to define "urges" as everything that you don't like, or that you find unpalatable. But you still have urges. You still have a set of preferences. You still have a disposition. There is nothing wrong with that. And if you think that there is, then please, by all means, become an ascetic and embrace celibacy. But something tells me that you aren't willing to go that far, because you only have a problem with the way our bodies work when it comes to people who don't fit into a certain mold.

Do not mistake me. I do not say this to "jump on you." I do not say this to disrespect you, or to insult you. I say this because I am being honest, in the same way that you have been honest. I say this because I don't see the benefit in not saying it.

[(Anonymous)]

Look, no, you are not heterosexual, not according to what you keep saying. You choose not to be attracted to a person of the same gender. Sexualities do not exist as a concept if they are 100% a lifestyle choice. So you are not "anything"sexual, you choose whom to be attracted to.

[(Anonymous)]

So you think the experience of gay people is exactly like yours, except they had a "thought" at some point?

I agree.

[duaedesigns]

So what you're saying, is you could choose to be attracted to one of your parents just, boom, snap your fingers and OHGODIWANNAFUCKMYDADSOBAD and be crazy in lust with him for a week, and then turn it off again?

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

First of all, the lot of you busting out these extreme examples just proves you really don't have an argument to stand on, and secondly, I have many many times seen espoused here on FS that "if it's only fantasy, it's OK!!" so I would turn that question back to YOU and say, if YOU were to choose to fantasize about that (which, ew on several levels, but let's say hypothetically), would you then use the argument "it's only fantasy so it's OK!!"? Why or why not?

...but I'm the one being accused of being ridiculous. Right.

[duaedesigns]

We're attempting to help you prove your hypothesis. You can choose who you're sexually attracted to, and who you're not sexually attracted to. When did you choose not to want to fuck your mom and dad? I'm curious. When did you sit down and go "I do not want to be attracted to my mom and dad, so I won't be!" And why haven't you decided to change your mind, just to see what it would be like?

[(Anonymous)]

Fantasies usually have some connection to reality. For example, when someone has a rape fantasy, it doesn't necessarily mean that they want to be raped -- it does, however, tend to mean that they have difficulty letting go sexually. Many women who grew up in repressive, patriarchal settings can only experience pleasure during sex when they pretend that they are being raped, because the notion that it's wrong for them to actually want it and be an active participant is so deeply ingrained.

Sexual fantasy is distinct from sexual and romantic attraction. The two stem from different sources. For instance, my fantasies involve extreme control, but I am not at all attracted to controlling men. Attraction comes from a very different place, and all of the evidence we have suggests that it is innate.

The trouble is that you won't buy biological explanations, because you don't like the idea that anything we do is connected to our biology. But here's the problem: if we were made, then we were made with bodies. We were made with our biology. Why would we be destined to reject that part of creation?

[diet_poison]

The definition of which I happen to personally disagree with, on religious grounds.

ok but "sexual attraction" actually has a scientific definition so that's not really up for debate. If you don't really mean "sexual attraction" but rather something else, you should clarify what it is that you mean.

with wanting to jump everything of the opposite gender in sight. (I also think this is an incorrect assumption/belief of how sexuality works, but it's reinforced culturally by the media kids consume, music videos, movies, like that.)

If you think that's what I meant when I said "hormones won", you're reading an awful lot into my comment that wasn't there. It simply means I was unable to control who I found attractive - who my mind, heart, and body responded to on a fundamental level. I was and am 100% capable of controlling how I chose to respond to that. And I have never behaved in that way nor do I think humans are doomed to be slaves to sexual urges or some bullshit, in fact I'm quite a proponent of the opposite view, that we're all quite capable of controlling ourselves.

I think people DO make that choice, in part because they buy into the "hormones override all rational thought" theory (which is, to put it politely, bogus), and with the cultural conditioning of "anything goes" these days, they follow up on whatever odd/stray thought may wander into their heads.

As clarified above, I don't buy into that theory either, and besides which it's not the point. The choice you seem to be talking about is the choice to act, not the choice to experience attraction.

The reference to Ezekiel is also beside the point. I'm not saying if God told you to do something because what He really wanted was for you to argue about it, but if He told you to do something and He meant it. In theory, what would you do?

[(Anonymous)]

If you think that's what I meant when I said "hormones won", you're reading an awful lot into my comment that wasn't there.

Sorry, not your comment, but I have heard/seen this attitude/belief from others "in the wild" as it were.

It simply means I was unable to control who I found attractive - who my mind, heart, and body responded to on a fundamental level.

OK, that's fair, I certainly will not discount your experiences, and I'm not saying you need to be different. There are a lot of reasons (physical being pretty much the lowest rung of the ladder) that a relationship with someone (of the opposite sex -- before I get another anon coming in and saying "then you must have homosexual urges!!" again) is definitely off the table for me, for the foreseeable future. (Whether that will change, I don't know.)

So part of it is rational, "This won't help my situation at all right now," but the rational part of that overrides the attraction part at the fundamental level you mention, i.e., because that's not what I'm looking for, not what I need, nor even really want, right now, so that's not what occurs to me at all when I interact with the opposite sex.

The choice you seem to be talking about is the choice to act, not the choice to experience attraction.

I'm not talking about the choice to act. There is no choice to act on something that's not there. Which, at this point in my life, is not there by my choice. I.e., I am not looking for a relationship right now, which is my choice, and this choice informs my choice that I not size up members of the opposite sex as potential relationship material, so I approach them from a neutral standpoint. Which is not often the case, generally speaking.

The reference to Ezekiel is also beside the point. I'm not saying if God told you to do something because what He really wanted was for you to argue about it, but if He told you to do something and He meant it. In theory, what would you do?

In theory, I refer you back to the reference to Ezekiel. The God I believe in and trust in would allow, maybe even expect, me to argue about it. So, the reference is really not beside the point, as it illustrates my perspective.

And that's it for me. I need to get a couple hours sleep. Sorry if anything I said was offensive.

[(Anonymous)]

I think I get it now.

You have this personal experience of how things are, and because you have experienced it that way, you've decided that everyone else must experience that way. And if they don't, well...it's because they've chosen not to, and not because they're different from you.

[diet_poison]

because that's not what I'm looking for, not what I need, nor even really want, right now, so that's not what occurs to me at all when I interact with the opposite sex.

Sounds like you're just not that interested right now, which is quite fair.

Which, at this point in my life, is not there by my choice. I.e., I am not looking for a relationship right now, which is my choice, and this choice informs my choice that I not size up members of the opposite sex as potential relationship material, so I approach them from a neutral standpoint.

It's great that you are able to rationally approach people the way you want to without feeling anything. It's also not that common. I'm not really looking for a relationship right now either, but if a guy looks cute to me I'm going to notice it. Doesn't mean I'm going to act or even mentally dwell on it, but I'll see it whether I want to or not. And from what I gather from talking to others this is a more common way of processing attraction.

In theory, I refer you back to the reference to Ezekiel. The God I believe in and trust in would allow, maybe even expect, me to argue about it. So, the reference is really not beside the point, as it illustrates my perspective.

This whole response is basically you saying "I don't want to answer the question you asked me, so I'll just give you a reason why I shouldn't have to". It's avoidance, though. I have a hard time taking your "attraction is a choice" seriously if you won't answer this fundamental question about the way you approach attraction.

And honestly, your whole comment gives me a vibe of "I'm straight and I've never had to struggle with this, and it's easier for me to just assume I'm doing it right and there's something wrong with teh gayz than wonder if some people are just naturally different". People don't just up and decide to be gay ffs.

[mimi-sardinia.livejournal.com]

You sound like you have never felt attraction.

[(Anonymous)]

Wow. You kind of sound like an asexual who instead of wondering 'Why am I not attracted to people like everyone seems to be?' decided 'Everybody must be like me, but is choosing to be attracted to people.'

Newsflash, kiddo, it doesn't matter how much your life changes, or whether-or-not you're ready for a relationship. You're never going to be able to 'choose' your way into being attracted to people. You may choose to date and procreate because it's what you think you're supposed to do, but no action in the world will make you straight.

[beverlykatz]

This... is baffling. I don't mean to be rude, although I recognize that there's not really a good way to say this, but it seems like you have some pretty major issues with sexuality.

(Not touching the "unpalatable" issue, but I agree with everyone upthread saying that homosexual thoughts are not wrong or against God.)

Also, you're assuming that hormones are by nature irrational, which isn't true. They're just hormones. They don't run your life, but you also don't run them. I can't MAKE myself attracted to men exclusively; the absolute closest I could get to not being bisexual is to stop acting on my attraction to women (which will never happen because fuck yeah women are great), and that's not actually changing my underlying feelings. To be honest I'm not sure why I'm engaging, though, because you seem very convinced and I don't think anything I say will change your mind.

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT

Also, you're assuming that hormones are by nature irrational, which isn't true.

Not to mention that hormones are actually very important when it comes to shaping our 'mind'.

Look at women going through 'the change', it's not called 'the change' for nothing. Or transgender people going on hormones. It's incredibly fascinating. IMO

[(Anonymous)]

Wow, you are actually, seriously rejecting reality and replacing it with your own beliefs. That is... that is just... special. You seriously have no evidence for any of this, you're just going "No, all this research and science is wrong, because that's not what I believe."

Seriously, people who think like you make you are the enemy of progress in society.