Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Spirituality & Beliefs > Love & Relationships -Friends and Family

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 19-01-2011, 06:56 PM
TheDivine
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perspective
TheDivine,
Homosexuality is a hot topic & Yonex briefly mentioned it on the side - speaking of deviations, which is correct. The history of homosexuality is irrelevant. If homosexuality was the norm (as oposed to deviation) you & I would not be here, since we are a product of an egg (from a woman) & a sperm (from a man). Anatomy also is obvious: a penis fits into a vagina, not into another penis, nor does a vagina fit with another vagina. I understand people experience homosexual feelings & orientation, for various reasons, but it is a deviation from nature.
But how many other deviations are there! We all "deviate" in some ways. So, in that way, I believe someone with homosexual orientation isn't that "deviated."

The word "deviation" is just a word you are arbitrarily attributing to a situation that does not seem "normal" to you. However, your view of "normal" is not relevant to the reality of homosexuality's presence in human activity and consciousness for all time. This has been confirmed scientifically and historically.

Your argument about reproduction is classic and also a misnomer. Homosexuality just means same-sex relations. It does not mean those partaking in those relations are exclusively homosexual per se. Entire Roman armies engaged in homosexual behaviours in order to strengthen battle bonds, for example, but most of them also had wives back on the home front.

Your attachment to "normalcy" as you arbitrarily define it is the issue here, and not the objective reality of what homosexuality is. All human sexuality is arguably "normal", since all variations have occurred at all times. You're acting like homosexuality is new, but it isn't. It has co-existed along with heterosexual reproduction for all of history.

It's your choice to cling to ignorance if you wish, but you are wrong. Plain and simple. Homosexuality is not a deviation, but a variation. The term "deviant" and other such slanted terminologies were written out of the DSM psychiatric books almost 50 years ago now. Get with the times.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 19-01-2011, 07:14 PM
Verunia Verunia is offline
Guide
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Northeast US
Posts: 675
  Verunia's Avatar
Quote:
The word "deviation" is just a word you are arbitrarily attributing to a situation that does not seem "normal" to you. However, your view of "normal" is not relevant to the reality of homosexuality's presence in human activity and consciousness for all time. This has been confirmed scientifically and historically.

Deviate merely means to depart from usual or accepted standards. I do not believe it was being used arbitrarily in the post you mention. Also, as far as normality goes, you're calling the kettle black on that one; your view of normal is going to be different than another person's view.

The history of homosexuality is no mystery, especially when it is concerning the Romans and the Greeks. But because it has co-existed with heterosexuality doesn't really mean a thing, unless you believe it to be so. The same goes for heterosexuality.

I think Perspective merely pointed out that the male and female anatomy were clearly intended to be together at some point. I have not heard an argument against nature, yet.

I wonder why you are getting so defensive, I think everyone's opinion is different and fascinating as long as there is no intended offense. "Get with the times" is awfully presumptuous of you.
__________________
"I teach you the overman. Man is something that shall be overcome. What have you done to overcome him?"
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 19-01-2011, 07:40 PM
themaster
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by yonex83
So what is this spiritual root or reason for our cheating?
There spiritual root of cheating.. is lack..

For even cheating is a lack word..

We are all capable, creator gods.. and what we put our attention on is what we get..

If you’re in a relationship with someone you want it "Exclusive" and they tell you it's exclusive.. but you go to work all day and worry your being cheating on..

You'll find you are or have been.. (because what you think about IS created!)

The whole problem that creates cheaters is very simple.. it's the problem that creates "exclusivity" as a negative thing..

When people start adopting open relationships that are not based in "fear" and lack.. then there will be less cheating.. and maybe than there will be more partners to play with.. without "games" of this is wrong..
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 20-01-2011, 09:28 AM
TheDivine
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verunia
Deviate merely means to depart from usual or accepted standards.

Yes I know what deviant means and that is my whole problem with the OP. Who are you or anyone to determine what "deviant" is, especially when it comes to spirituality OR sexuality?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Verunia
I do not believe it was being used arbitrarily in the post you mention. Also, as far as normality goes, you're calling the kettle black on that one; your view of normal is going to be different than another person's view.

I don't use the word "normal" or "abnormal" to describe things as complex as sexuality, so your point doesn't even apply to me, and it demonstrates that you don't even get where I'm coming from.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Verunia
The history of homosexuality is no mystery, especially when it is concerning the Romans and the Greeks. But because it has co-existed with heterosexuality doesn't really mean a thing, unless you believe it to be so. The same goes for heterosexuality.

This comment is really just a platitude. Of course nothing means anything unless I want it to... but I was clearly addressing an inaccuracy in the OP. He claimed that homosexuality and other "deviant" behaviours are at higher levels than they have ever been. That is simply a false statement. If you wish to render the argument more subjective by deconstructing meanings, be my guest. Historical realities are what they are and you can't change that.

The historical realities establish trends that have always existed. Arbitrarily calling homosexuality deviant or abnormal is simply false. Those behaviours have always existed. Anything that people can do with sex, has been done and is happening now. We can talk about it in terms of what is socially acceptable to you or I, but as an objective statement, homosexual behaviour has always existed in equal proportions to how it exists now. The only thing that has changed over time is its level of visibility and acceptance. Even calling it "deviant" is a product of social values, but stating it so emphatically is quite arrogant. If someone came into the discussion saying, "I think homosexuality is deviant", I could accept their reality. What I can't accept is someone blaming homosexuals on their own cheating ways, as if the behaviour of one person is responsible for your own choices. Gays have been scapegoats for all sorts of things throughout history, being subject to ridicule, imprisonment, torture, and execution. It all starts with the kind of scapegoating demonstrated in the OP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Verunia
I think Perspective merely pointed out that the male and female anatomy were clearly intended to be together at some point. I have not heard an argument against nature, yet.

Congratulations in knowing human reproductive anatomy, but sexuality is not just reproduction. It is social bonding and exchange, it has a spiritual level, and is a function of two people connecting via intimacy. If every time people had sex it was for reproduction only, then women would only be going into heat during ovulation. At it stands, men and women do not have optimal breeding seasons; they have sex at any given time regardless if it will produce a child.

Furthermore, activities such as oral sex, manual sex, and other forms of non-penetrative sex demonstrate that it can't all be boiled down to male meets female anatomy. In fact, seeing sex ONLY as penetrative is an extremely limited view of sexuality and for that you have my deepest pity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Verunia
I wonder why you are getting so defensive, I think everyone's opinion is different and fascinating as long as there is no intended offense. "Get with the times" is awfully presumptuous of you.

I'm not getting defensive. I am being corrective. There's a difference. False information deserves correction at every opportunity, especially when it comes to the absurd things I am seeing in the OP. Coming at human sexuality from a hetero-normative standpoint is denying the extremely diverse range of sexual behaviours that humans exhibit, both in history AND in this present point in time.

Calling something "deviant" is a judgment call no matter what way you slice it. When you are ready to have an honest discussion about human sexuality without the attachment to value judgments of which behaviours are "normal" and which are "deviant", then you will be more enabled to understand where I am coming from and the true scope of human sexuality, which is truly limitless.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 20-01-2011, 03:02 PM
Verunia Verunia is offline
Guide
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Northeast US
Posts: 675
  Verunia's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDivine
When you are ready to have an honest discussion about human sexuality without the attachment to value judgments of which behaviours are "normal" and which are "deviant", then you will be more enabled to understand where I am coming from and the true scope of human sexuality, which is truly limitless.

To be honest, I am ready to have a discussion- though I am rather enjoying this one. I do not disagree that human sexuality is limitless. I would reply to everything you said in the previous post but I feel that you responded with a fine reply. Not that it matters really- but, I just thought I would throw that out there.

Though I must admit, I am not proposing anything about sexuality as normal or deviant, it's not in my power to do so. I have my own beliefs and desires, but those are merely my own. I understand where you are coming from for the most part, but I do not think anyone's answer is conclusive as right or wrong.
__________________
"I teach you the overman. Man is something that shall be overcome. What have you done to overcome him?"
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 20-01-2011, 04:05 PM
Perspective Perspective is offline
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,091
  Perspective's Avatar
Verunia,
Thanks for being a good example of peace-making.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 20-01-2011, 07:40 PM
TheDivine
Posts: n/a
 
Having a debate doesn't mean there isn't peace.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 20-01-2011, 08:50 PM
TheDivine
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verunia
Though I must admit, I am not proposing anything about sexuality as normal or deviant, it's not in my power to do so. I have my own beliefs and desires, but those are merely my own. I understand where you are coming from for the most part, but I do not think anyone's answer is conclusive as right or wrong.

If that's really where you're coming from, then I feel open to discussing things further with you. I acknowledge that my standpoint is built upon my own experience as a homosexual, and I have experienced so many twisted ideologies geared towards hating people like me that I perhaps am anticipating them too much. However, it is extremely important to disperse ignorance (or at least try) when it comes to blatant misinformation.

Homosexuals have rights in the modern world but they are built upon a very delicate platform and understanding, and it's important to maintain accuracy along the way or those rights could easily be removed and relegated back to hateful practices. It's very easy for someone like the person in the OP to come along and put forth a pet theory that casually calls homosexuals deviants. They have nothing to lose. I have everything to lose if the laws no longer protect my right to fall in love with who I want, to get married, or to raise a family with my partner. The prejudice still exists and the misinformation only contributes to it.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 20-01-2011, 08:53 PM
Deusdrum Deusdrum is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,158
  Deusdrum's Avatar
I just finished a course on the 'Sociology of Deviance'. From what the "experts" had to say, homosexuality is defined as deviant; (though the author of the textbook predicts that if current trends continue, it will not be considered deviant in a generation or so, i can't say for sure if i agree, but it seems reasonable)

I think its important to make the distinction obviously between 'deviant' and 'wrong' or 'bad'. To have a tattoo is deviant. To smoke a cigarrette is starting to become more deviant (though in the past, it was a 'norm' though hardly much more healthy etc. etc.) Dying your hair purple is deviant. Having an abnormally large wart is deviant. It is not a term synonymous with 'bad'.

Straight from my text: "Deviance is behaviour, beliefs, or characteristics (or behaviour, beliefs, or characteristics that are imputed to a particular person) that many people in a society find or would find offensive and which excite, upon discovery, punishment, condemnation, or hostility. Deviance is behaviour, beliefs, or characteristics that are likely to generate a negative reaction in others."

(note that deviance changes from time a place. A wiccan in the 1700's might be burned at the stake, a Muslim would be deviant if he showed up in a Jewish synagogue, etc. again, not a matter of good/bad, but a measure of people concepts of what they define 'normal' or not at any given time or place)

Bout all i have to say, just wanted to flex my post-secondary educational muscles there for everyone *Gaaaarrr!!* Beyond this, i do not wish to weigh in further on the debate, which is somewhat off topic now, as is.
__________________
What are the stars, but points in the body of God where we insert the healing needles of our terror and longing? - Thomas Pynchon, Gravity's Rainbow
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 20-01-2011, 08:59 PM
TheDivine
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deusdrum
I just finished a course on the 'Sociology of Deviance'. From what the "experts" had to say, homosexuality is defined as deviant; (though the author of the textbook predicts that if current trends continue, it will not be considered deviant in a generation or so, i can't say for sure if i agree, but it seems reasonable)

I think its important to make the distinction obviously between 'deviant' and 'wrong' or 'bad'. To have a tattoo is deviant. To smoke a cigarrette is starting to become more deviant (though in the past, it was a 'norm' though hardly much more healthy etc. etc.)

Bout all i have to say, just wanted to flex my post-secondary educational muscles there for everyone *Gaaaarrr!!*

The institutions are reinforcing of the dominant ideology. Just because you learned it in school does not mean it's correct, or that other schools wouldn't teach something different. At the same time, I can understand the ACADEMIC level meaning of the word "deviant", but you have to understand that even academia is not free from social biases. Even the terms "homosexual", "heterosexual", "bisexual", etc. are all rather absolute terms to apply to human sexuality, even though humans tend to fall on different points of the spectrum. Kinsey, for all of his flawed research methods, did effectively demonstrate that the majority of the population fall somewhere between absolute heterosexual and absolute homosexual.

Given that, how can we say what is "deviant"? Even the academic level meaning presumes a norm, i.e. heterosexual dominance... but it has been demonstrated that even though not many people self-label as GAY, many, many more people than the self-labelled gays partake or have partaken in homosexual acts. Numbers as large as 50-60% of the population have had a sexual experience with the same sex. Again I ask, how do you define "deviant" from the social norm, given that the social norms are fake in the first place?

All I'm saying is, that the dominant ideology about this is at LEAST debatable. The vast majority of sexology research goes into heterosexuality. Something like 5-10% goes into homosexuality. There are still enormous grey areas that we know nothing about, so any conclusions at this time are likely inaccurate at best.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums