Devis4657

Fair. The. Just say that. The title is somewhat misleading 

Except even this argument doesn’t make sense. If you will here is my idea for it. It’s not flawless to say the least. 

If an individual who is “non binary”  is outside the sexual dichotomy of male and female that in and of itself requires definition. Not vagaries…..

All life born of reptilian or mammalian copulation are born vaginally. The outliers lay within the human realm solely. Examples such as C section. However this is not a natural concept in nature. It is a procedure borne of human ingenuity. Show me another species that can perform this surgically. With or without anesthesia? It doesn’t exist. 

Next the principle that something cannot come from nothing…. The individual components had to already have been there. 

Sexually speaking you cannot claim that non binary exists solely in this realm and nowhere else. 

This is the definition I found of non binary in a sexual aspect. 

Like anyone else, nonbinary people have sexual orientations that reflect who they're attracted to. They can be straight, gay, bisexual, asexual, or whatever sexuality they feel best describes them.

Several questions. 

1. Are they themselves non binary? Outside the sexual dichotomy? If so can you define the new “being” and how it differs from the average male or female?

2. If it is solely a mental application…. Then the subjects themselves are male and female. This is just saying they can fuck whoever they want. Is that not the same thing as BI?  If they can fluidly select what they are attracted to at any given moment what determines this? Are they attracted to men one moment then not as they are attracted to a woman the next? Or more likely as I postulate they have their original sexual orientation however they are able to recognize a handsome/ beautiful qualities in members of the same sex. 

Next section. 

But your being even more short sighted than I am. No offense meant. When you say that gay sex is solely for fun…. You discard the possibility of actual loving relationship in the process. Don’t get me wrong I agree with you but it seems an odd position for you to have. 

Actually no. If you’d read my statement you’d have seen that I believed heterosexuality to be the only sexual orientation. With all others being outside the norm a result of following trauma in essence. 

Can assure you I’m not gay. I can’t tell what there is to like sexually about men. I asked my girlfriend and what she told me I never want to hear again. Forgive me but it’s rather grotesques when transposed on male attraction to another 

One day we will all be gone…. This is rather pointless…it’s fun to mock politicians sure…..but let someone cast a spotlight on your own life and let the world scrutinize it in detail and mock you or champion you…. You would whistle s very different tune 

Yes but OP is not speaking of fun in sex. That’s not the discussion but rather sexual orientation isn’t a choice. 

There is an obligation: one to yourself(debateable), one to your spouse- to have children, responsibility to your parents and ancestry if your so philosophically inclined, and finally your obligation to your home/country.  Your not religious I think or I would have added your obligation to god. 

That’s an odd statement. Even though I believe in god I can see why others wouldn’t. But GAY is a product of overthink while non binary relationships are not? That’s a really bad argument friend. 

1. Non binary makes no sense. Bear with me. And I’d like to hear your rebuttal if your so inclined….

Non-binary: denoting, having, or relating to a gender identity that does not conform to traditional binary beliefs about gender, which indicate that all individuals are exclusively either male or female.

Here’s the problem with that…. That definition is idyllic. It does not fit the actuality of the situation on the ground as I’ve seen it. So when I ask someone what non-binary is I get multiple definitions. It’s not standard. Things along the lines of

1. I’m either a man or woman as I choose. 

2. I’m something else altogether. 

The problem here is that within the ideology you cannot define terms in a way that doesn’t clash.  If you have the ability to be either a man or woman at your choosing you have to define what both of them are. You’ve heard Matt Walsh phrase what is a woman? I don’t want a character debate on Matt Walsh. He is correct though. You need to know exactly what it is you are claiming to be.

I am an adult human male. Identifiable by the penis and balls I have for reproductive organs. This is a trait ALL men share. My bone structure is larger than the average woman’s in my race, age group. Most men’s are. My strength is average for a male. My chest is flat. Their are no boobs with mammary glands…. I cannot lactate. Something exclusive to women. I cannot give birth. I lack the reproductive organs and the structure to do so. I excrete semen. ALL men do this. If an archeologist digs up my bones in 1000 years they will say adult male.

Women: have female reproductive organs. Vagina, ovaries, fallopian tubes, breasts, mammary glands, ability to lactate. Smaller stature in comparison of race and age. Wider hips for childbirth. Damn beautiful in my opinion but that’s another matter. An archeologist digs up my sister in 1000 years he will say adult human female. 

There are no other sexes. Intersex is a thing yes. But trans are not intersex. True intersex bear sexual features of both sexes. However one is more prominent. They take that as their sex. They are typically make. I believe their are only 11 cases of true intersex producing offspring due to having correct reproductive parts. But all of that is a true rarity. Check 95%+ transgenders today. Even with their surgeries they are still anatomically their original sex. Mutilated but distinguishable nonetheless. Or those who haven’t had surgery at all. Much easier to identify absent diagnostic testing.

Also when you go to the hospital none of that matters. I can say I’m a woman. And that’s dangerous. Women have different numbers for dosages, labs, etc. surgeries are performed differently due to different anatomy. Treating and operating on s man as if he’s a woman is malpractice. Any errors sueable…. 

Next the claim lf being something else altogether….

Define it.tell me I am a 5’9 brown skin bald puerto Rican who stays fit…. Can I identify as a Asian lesbian tommorow? Why not? A black woman? A yxhxd? A :(!$.!  ? Why not? The idea is absurd. Can I identify as handsome billionaire? Why not? Why does no one affirm this. While I am handsome and charming…. I’m no billionaire. My bank account proves that. 

Claiming to be not of same sex is foolishness. Even with surgery, alterations, makeup and the like any man or woman is still identifiable with diagnostic testing.  

Gender wise: makes even less sense. If gender is not tied to sex.. is completely malleable it needs to be define-able. Not whimsical. People who identify as dogs, cats, children? They can’t. They do not possess the anatomy nor social characteristics nor linguistics nor abilities of what they pretend to be. They are mimicking. How does a man know why s woman acts as she does? He doesn’t. I can put on my girls panties dress, go buy a wig and use her bag and make up. Omen now what? As ludicrous as that is. I now have to walk like a woman. Socialize like one. Think like one. Women do have different opinions but the way they think is similar to each other and very different from men’s. I can strut around …. Doesn’t give me s woman’s poise nor grace. I can talk like they do waving my hands, gibberish and screaming in excitement. I would look like a dumbass. Not because women do when they act that way… it’s that I would be creating s mockery of it. Fake. Same in reverse. A woman can copy general men’s walks, talking style, etc. that’s feminism. A mockery of men’s natural attributes. A dimming if their own amazing feminine ones. 

Next to create another gender you would have to differentiate it from what already is. Not copy it. There’s 0 point to thst. What are the attributes of this “new gender” what makes it different than the standard? Is it realistic? 

I think porn should be outright banned across the board. 

Definitions: 

porn: television programs, magazines, books, etc. that are regarded as emphasizing the sensuous or sensationalaspects of a nonsexual subject and stimulating a compulsive interest in their audience.

Now the subject brought up is the precious children…I could not find an unbiased source for children viewing porn at what age. On statista, pew research, etc. I did find many that swing both ways from as low was 64% of children had seen pornographic material to 90%+. Depending who is trying to sell you what. 

I tend to be in the 90%+ crowd only because of the prevalence of sexuality in the culture. Children have access at an unprecedented level. They don’t need to see out hardcore porn sites. They can just go to YouTube. 100% of rap/hip hop/ r&B is sexually oriented. Most other categories have some to large degrees of this in their content. 

Now search through videos. How many women or men are scantily clad? Quite a few. Remember the definition. Porn is anything that would not ordinarily be seen in a sexy light (video, book, tic toc, tweet, whatever.). 

You can make the argument of a certain amount of normalization but even that makes no sense. If a member of the opposite gender walks 100 yards in front of you on the beach scantily clad. You are going to notice. Any average member of the opposite sex will peak sexual interest if healthy and fit. Now the caveat is action. Do you have enough attraction to consider for more than a millisecond? Approach? Entice? Copulate? Each level requires more effort. Now this scenario is for the general average/above average healthy- fit male/female. When you add in obesity and other abnormalities it doesn’t work. But that’s the point those are outside the norm.  

The point being you still noticed the other sex. Sized them up sexually. Either a yes or no. But you did. 

Your family is different. Unless your from Alabama😂(joke), sexual relationships with relatives are abhorrent.  You cannot make the case of sleeping in a room with mother or cousin or dad, etc. why because on a societal level you have agreed that is wrong. There is no such standard anywhere else. 

Now back to porn. My dad had a saying…. 99% of men watch porn. The other 1% are damn filthy liars….. and the trend grows amoung women as well. Look at the marriage an divorce rates. Amount of singles per country. The services that cater to singles. 

Next I go into nofap. 

1. Those are some crazy dudes who got excuses.

2. It’s not all bro science.  When you masturbate it is known that your body is flooded with a cocktail of hormones. For both men and women. Excessive amounts of these hormones leads to……singleness in essence. Lessening of the traits of the given sex. Through sheer bombing of hormonal fatigue. 

With all do respect I disagree. Being gay is a choice.

Now I’d like to actually define terms:

Gay: a man who is sexually attracted to another man

Straight: a man or woman sexually attracted to the opposite sex. 

I will begin with what is the primary sexual disposition…. Heterosexuality or being straight.

That is the default. 

You cannot suppose any other sexual orientation to be the primary sexual disposition. For that to be so it would have had to have been recognized as the official stance by any state in history. There are none. While you will note instances of sexuality between men, very prominent in Greek cultures. But not the main sexuality of the state for one simple fact. No children are produced.

You can ignore the sexually transmitted diseases aspect historically if you wish, but nonetheless relevant.

But the fact remains for any nation to survive they require a new generation. Repeatedly. For women to run the home, men to fight, business, whatever.  Failure to reproduce led to a shortage of fighters, economy, or mothers to support the family. The states are tribes/states are either whittled down into nothing, or are conquered or economically dominated by someone who did continue the cycle. You can find no civilizations this didn’t exist. 

So, now I would deviate into the actual benefits of gay sex from an evolutionary standpoint. There are none. This completely disposes of evolution theory. And what is evolution theory? 

According to the theory, individuals with traits that enable them to adapt to their environments will help them survive and have more offspring, which will inherit those traits. Individuals with less adaptive traits will less frequently survive to pass them on. Over time, the traits that enable species to survive and reproduce will become more frequent in the population and the population will change, or evolve, according to BioMed Central. Through natural selection, Darwin suggested, genetically diverse species could arise from a common ancestor. - end quote

The entire purpose? Reproduction. Gay sex does not accomplish that. Hence if there had been a gay gene it would have been “mutated” out so to speak. There are no beneficial traits in this biologically speaking. Emotion has nothing to do with this. I’ve heard the theory of the “Gay uncle” but even in that, what is the point? Other males who have offspring can just as easily compensate. If not better in animals that form packs. having loose males makes no sense. 

Also you will note that in the animal kingdom gay sex between males in a form of domination. Not love. See monkeys. I see no species that do so and find life long mates. 

Genetically there is no reason for this. 

The only possibility then is the mind. I’m no expert oj the mind and think you are not either. 

So if we can agree that the origins are not genetic then it would originate there. Why would the mind create such an attraction? I postulate trauma. Damage. Of either a physical nature of psychological. A defect if you will. I mean no insult by this I am speaking in general terms. If the default in sexual orientation is male-female. Deviation not of genetic orientation is an anomaly. A defect. 

I picture next you will show me the studies on the “gay gene”. Fair. But again very contradictory to evolution theory. If you postulate it as anything other than a genetic defect. Also how do you know that that is what codes for a gay gene? Do all males have this gene? Or some? Do all who possess the gene express gay desires? Or only a select few? Does that gene expression contradict in any other manner? Not in a science article someone else made. In your own words. ELI5 me. 

Your next argument is biblical. God possibly made you gay. The evidence against this statement is manifold. The biblical position on sexual relations between same sex couples is clear. 

Leviticus 18:22 ~ You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.
Leviticus 20:13 ~ If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.
Jude 1:7 ~ Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire

By claiming the possibility that god made you that way you are stating that god is contradictory. Prone to mistakes. Or worse made you especially for damnation. Both are bad and false ideas. 

You say that others should not take revenge and that god is love? True. But that is not the same as affirmation. He commands his disciples to love the sinner not the sin. 

In the end you are partially correct. How you act in your attraction is a choice. However I believe sexual orientation outside the norm is a choice