Sexuality's Double Standard

[Hobbit]

Ok, I've been doing a lot of thinking about the constant sexuality debates in this country and I've noticed one thing particularly odd. Both liberals and conservatives, in general, have a double standard concerning the nature of sexuality, thought their double standards are polar opposites.

To a conservative, who holds zero tolerance for sexual deviance, homosexuality is a choice. You aren't born homosexual, and if you really do choose to, you can become straight with therapy and insight into whatever caused you to be gay. This leaves no excuse for homosexuals, meaning no gay rights, because it's voluntary deviance, which should be discouraged.

On the other side of the standard lie the illegal deviants. Namely, pedophiles. Conservatives contend that a pedophile has this type of behavior ingrained within their heads and cannot possibly be cured. Once they become pedophiles, you might as well write them off as society's waste, to be discarded without remorse. This, of course, leads to the conservative viewpoints of no mercy towards pedophiles. Longer prison sentences, no sentence-shortening therapy, and neutering are the order of the day for the conservative's pedophile stance. Since pedophiles cannot be cured, this is the best way to keep them from acting again.

Liberals, on the other hand, argue that homosexuality is involuntary and is something ingrained in the person's head from birth, or at least from the time they become sexually aware. They can't help that they're gay, so they should be allowed to live out their lives as gay people and be able to have special conveniences that allow them to gain all the benefits of a normal, heterosexual relationship without actually being heterosexual.

The flip-side of this one with pedophiles is that most liberals, always on the side of compassion over all else, believe that pedophiles have some sort of fixable problem, something wrong with them that can be treated with therapy, allowing the redeemed pedophile to go back into the world without those desires. With enough therapy, any pedophile can work at any child-oriented business without ever repeating his past crime. They're perfectly reformable and should be given this rehabilitation in order to allow them to live normal, happy lives.

Now, while I have seen some who do not subscribe to either double standard, they are rare, and though I disagree with some (Nuc comes to mind), I must admire their consistency.

So, once and for all, I'd like to ask the many of you I have seen subscribe to mainly the former double standard the ultimate question: Which is it? Is sexual preference something you are born and stuck with or is it something that develops and can be changed? It's either one or the other, pick one.

 

[dmp]

yup.

 

[Hagbard Celine]

Good post Hobbit and valid questions. I personally think homosexuals choose to be gay at some point whether consciously or subconsciously. I think all sexual behavior is voluntary.
But I think you're right when you say that many liberals believe homosexuality is genetic. I think sexuality can be influenced by genetics. For example, men who are born with abnormally low testosterone levels would be naturally more feminine. The same for women with high testosterone or low feminine hormone levels. Many physical-hormonal factors can come into play.
Sexual experiences or molestations as children could also lead to homosexual or deviant sexual behavior.
But I have a theory I'd like to lay on you. I think individual sexuality is defined or shaped more by society than anything else. By society, I mean all things outside the body that influence sexual preference.
All people are born with sex drive. Some people's drive is stronger than others, but this drive starts out as a blank slate that is influenced by personality, life experiences, and preferences that are molded and shaped by other environmental, outside influences while the person is growing into sexual maturity.
Look at the Ancient, classical Greeks. Bi-sexuality was very much a normal part and some would say "right" of being a Greek. But if you look at Greek culture, you see that it was very humanistic. The Greeks idolized, almost worshipped the human form and held physical beauty as the leading indicator of personal worth.
So it's easy, atleast for me, to see why having sex with beautiful people, whether they were men or women would have been like a status or dominance thing. Our society is very different. With the advent and spread of Christianity and the abolishment of Pagan ideals, even hetero sex is a very guarded subject laced with taboos.
Because sex is less "open" in our society and because of the prevailing values laid down in the cultural foundation of our society, there are fewer individuals who attempt or even think of engaging in acts of sexual "deviance." And that is why I think homos are just people who, for one reason or another have bypassed the cultural taboos that keep the rest of us straight. What do you think?

 

[Hobbit]

I'm a big believer in choice. I don't think sex drive is a blank slate. After all, genetic preference would have filtered out at least most deviant genes long ago, as these types of sex drives don't tend to lead towards children, but I do believe that society can influence sexuality. The prevalence of pornography I think has a lot to do with it. The stuff's like a drug, and deviant porn is that extra dose that's eventually needed to get the same rush. Deviant porn leads to deviant fantasies, which, in turn, lead to deviant acts. While not everyone crosses all of these thresholds, many have done so. It still all boils down to choice, and I think that one's sexual desires can, over time and with the right influences, change to anything desired. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

 

[theHawk]

I don't really agree with these assesments. I don't consider homosexuality as something that is curable or that can be fixed with therapy. I do not care what homosexuals do with themselves and I don't believe I have ever heard of mainstream conservatives say they want to take away any of their rights. What we don't want to do is give them special rights that publicly condone their actions (i.e. legalized gay marriage). Nor do I care whether or not pedophiles' thoughts is ingrained or not, the point is they are hurting young innocent people and should be locked up. Can they be changed to become 'normal' through therapy ect? Maybe, I don't really know. But I do know I'd rather play it safe than sorry and give pedophiles longer sentences rather than giving them some therapy and hoping they don't molest more children.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I don't think you can blanket statement either homosexuality or pedophilia. I'd say some make choices through conscious decisions, some through subconscious decisions, and some never make the decision. I think some can be "cured" and some can't.

But I don't think you can just say "All pedophiles are (or are not) curable." It just doesn't work that way, IMO.

 

[Shattered]

I don't think you can blanket statement either homosexuality or pedophilia. I'd say some make choices through conscious decisions, some through subconscious decisions, and some never make the decision. I think some can be "cured" and some can't.

But I don't think you can just say "All pedophiles are (or are not) curable." It just doesn't work that way, IMO.

I, for one, am unwilling to take the chance. I prefer to think none of them are curable, and they should be punished appropriately.

 

[Nuc]

I think homosexuality for men is usually something ineradicable that they are born with. Why else would they do it?

For women sometimes this is true, but there are also asexual women who practice homosexuality for political reasons, or because they are sick of being mistreated by men. Sometimes they conveniently switch to heterosexual behavior to procreate.

I think pedophilia is generally a crime of violence using sex as a tool, rather than a sexual orientation. And of course pedophilia crosses homosexual/heterosexual lines.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I, for one, am unwilling to take the chance. I prefer to think none of them are curable, and they should be punished appropriately.

I wasn't saying anything other than that I don't think they are all in the same boat. You're gonna make me look like I want kiddie rapists getting 2 years of prison an rehibilitation...

 

[Avatar4321]

When anyone denies that they can change they deny that they themselves are human. Because its a gift that we can change. Id say more but i have to run.

 

[Zhukov]

I believe pedophilia, homosexuality, and bisexuality in males has a big genetic component. That is to say, some males are predisposed to pedophilial, homosexual, or bisexual tendencies. Sometimes these tendencies surface independent of nuture, sometimes these tendencies will only surface after being subjected to some source of sexual abuse in the individuals formative years. In a very small fraction of pedophiliac, homosexual, and bisexual males I believe the sole cause is sexual abuse in their formative years, and these people might be curable with therapy.


I believe bisexuality in females is a beautiful and natural thing...

 

[dmp]

I think homosexuality for men is usually something ineradicable that they are born with. Why else would they do it?

The 'why else would they do it' argument. That argument 'briefs well' but there are thousands of detrimental behaviours people do for a myriad of reasons. Why would somebody light burning poo in a paper bag on somebody else's doorstep? Why would somebody smoke crack? Why would somebody be a Christian in Feed-Christians-to-the-Lions days?

Because, knowing the consequences, they choose to. They get something out of their choice - a High...Pleasure...Strength of being...anything.

For women sometimes this is true, but there are also asexual women who practice homosexuality for political reasons, or because they are sick of being mistreated by men. Sometimes they conveniently switch to heterosexual behavior to procreate.

I believe this goes along with mentioned above - social pressures. I bet if I were in highschool today, and confessed to my guidance counselor my like of interior design, style, wine, etc, I'd have a pretty good chance of being labelled 'gay'. Truth is I don't enjoy action flicks much, I recognize when other men are 'nice looking', and sometimes...sometimes...I just like to cozy under a blanket during a rainstorm. Those attributes have NOTHING to do with my sexual preferences - they are just things I like. Too often, I feel we take young men who share those likes, and force them into a sexual category.

I think pedophilia is generally a crime of violence using sex as a tool, rather than a sexual orientation. And of course pedophilia crosses homosexual/heterosexual lines.

But pedophilia is ALL about sex for the perp. It's about the unrestrained, or misunderstood sexual desires of the perp.

 

[Nuc]

But pedophilia is ALL about sex for the perp. It's about the unrestrained, or misunderstood sexual desires of the perp.

A lot of the time. In the case of the pedophile priests there may be more to it. As priests they are overly interested in the idea of God. They may be molesting children because the power rush they get makes them feel God-like.

Whatever the reason, I think pedophiles are so far out of reality that they can never be trusted by society and should be locked up permanently.

 

[no1tovote4]

So, once and for all, I'd like to ask the many of you I have seen subscribe to mainly the former double standard the ultimate question: Which is it? Is sexual preference something you are born and stuck with or is it something that develops and can be changed? It's either one or the other, pick one.

I don't believe that it is one or the other. I think that while I was certainly born heterosexual that some would be born homosexual, others may get excited by the fact that it is outside the norm and therefore choose such a thing. Much like a fetish. People that are more excited by such activity that is outside the norm might grow out of that fetish and change their sexual behavior. Maybe choosing something like S&M after finding a willing partner rather than finding a fix for that semi-illict feeling in same sex relationships.

I also think that some people might have more attraction for the opposite sex but still have some attraction to those of the same sex and therefore may find themselves in both types of relationships.

 

[dmp]

A lot of the time. In the case of the pedophile priests there may be more to it. As priests they are overly interested in the idea of God. They may be molesting children because the power rush they get makes them feel God-like.

Whatever the reason, I think pedophiles are so far out of reality that they can never be trusted by society and should be locked up permanently.

I believe it must have been homosexual activists who coined the phrase 'For rape, it's not about the sex, it's about the control/power'.

I don't buy that ONE bit. I'd argue in the VAST majority of rape cases it boils down to ONE thing:

Unrestrained sexual urges.

Some people haven't the sense to keep their urges controlled. Some vent that by raping other people. Some vent that by having sex with another man.

Both behaviours are deviant and destructive.

 

[Nuc]

I believe it must have been homosexual activists who coined the phrase 'For rape, it's not about the sex, it's about the control/power'.

I don't buy that ONE bit. I'd argue in the VAST majority of rape cases it boils down to ONE thing:

Unrestrained sexual urges.

Some people haven't the sense to keep their urges controlled. Some vent that by raping other people. Some vent that by having sex with another man.

Both behaviours are deviant and destructive.

You've probably weighed in on this one in another thread, but why do you think there is such a high rate of pedophilia in the priesthood?

 

[no1tovote4]

You've probably weighed in on this one in another thread, but why do you think there is such a high rate of pedophilia in the priesthood?

There are groups where these people get together and speak with each other about this. NAMBLA for one. The church's actions of hiding it and keeping them from jail got them a reputation among such groups as a good place for men with such proclivities to be able to perpetrate their crime on the young and get away with it. This made the catholic church a magnet for such perverts and created a place of protection for them when it became apparent that they had lost all control of the situation.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I believe it must have been homosexual activists who coined the phrase 'For rape, it's not about the sex, it's about the control/power'.

I don't buy that ONE bit. I'd argue in the VAST majority of rape cases it boils down to ONE thing:

Unrestrained sexual urges.

Some people haven't the sense to keep their urges controlled. Some vent that by raping other people. Some vent that by having sex with another man.

Both behaviours are deviant and destructive.

homosexuals and rapists are equal in your book?

 

[Nuc]

There are groups where these people get together and speak with each other about this. NAMBLA for one. The church's actions of hiding it and keeping them from jail got them a reputation among such groups as a good place for men with such proclivities to be able to perpetrate their crime on the young and get away with it. This made the catholic church a magnet for such perverts and created a place of protection for them when it became apparent that they had lost all control of the situation.

I don't know of any data, but I find it hard to believe that people would be able to go through the seminary and find a vocation as a priest if their sole purpose was to use the institution as a shield for their pedophilia. They must first be Catholic and then it seems without any religious motivation for becoming priests they'd have to be great actors. Then they should just go into acting, lots of sex there!

I wonder if older pedophile priests influence/initiate/corrupt sincere young ones into this lifestyle.

 

[5stringJeff]

Hobbit, that is a grand slam post. Excellent question!

In response, I believe that all sexual behavior is motivated by choice. Except for cases of rape, engaging in sex is a choice, made by free moral agents (humans), who are capable of making the decision as to whether or not to engage in that activity.