Would you "cure" a child of homosexuality?

[JohnnyV]

Here's a bizarre philosophical question:

If science developed a way to treat a pregnant woman so that the baby would come out heterosexual, would you "immunize" your baby from turning out gay or bi?

We love our children and don't want them to suffer discrimination or pain, so maybe it would be natural to want to make sure they come out heterosexual.

But on the other hand, I believe God makes people the way they are for a reason, and I, as the father of a week-old newborn, could never imagine trying to change my baby's destiny.

Anyone have any thoughts?

J

[DÆMØN]

My answer is a simple NO ! and the same thing applies do Deaf children or even Deafness... if there was a pill that suddenly could turn me into a hearie. I'd say NO! for the same reasons. Its Who I am. As for newborn family menbers leave them be to decide for themselves what "labels" they want to wear. Freedom of choice and freedom to pick and choose cultural and moral values. With any luck the new individual will choose to be a decent human.

[DiamondDog]

No.
Lots of parents/society/religion try to do this already and it doesn't work.
Or the whole ex-gay thing born again xtians try to do is just bullshit.

Or how being anything other than 100% heterosexual/monogamous/vanilla was in America (and still is, in some countries) seen as a mental illness, or "wrong".

Sorry, I've just seen a lot of people get fucked up by heteronormativity.

see also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heteronormativity#Beliefs

[Mrs.F]

Absolutely NOT! There will always be something that people will discriminate against. Now that my eyes have been opened..no matter what my son's sexual preference is...I just want him to be happy!

Mrs.F :)

[jedinudist]

Absolutely not.

[woolleygirl]

:mad: HELL NO :disgust:

A child is innocent an needs no curing unless dying. They are not sick they are just themselves and developing there own special place. As for curing them what is there to cure they will make there own dissions we just need to support them not cure them OH #@$!#$@@$#@@. this just pisses me off.

I love my boys what they decide is what they want i only wish them happieness.

T

[canuckotter]

There was a SF story I read years ago where this was the premise. I think it might have been in Asimov's?

Anyway, since reading that story, I've thought about it off and on. And with my baby on the way, I can definitively answer: NO. I'd debated it for a long time (in a purely hypothetical sense, obviously) and thought that maybe it would be easier for the child... But no, if I had the power to choose, I'd rather leave the choice to nature. My baby will be who my baby will be, and I look forward to finding out who that is. :)

[JohnnyV]

Canuck,

You and I must be on the same wavelength... I debated it hypothetically for the last few weeks of my wife's pregnancy. One gay male friend mocked me and said that I'm still too straight to be okay with my daughter turning into a hairy lesbian. I told him I'd *love* it if my daughter was a big ol' dyke, then I wouldn't have to deal with dumb teenage boys hitting on her!!! ;)

There are many scientists worldwide trying to track down the genetic and hormonal factors that orient some people toward different genders, early in development. Already, some people hope that by identifying the "cause" they can create an "antidote."

My question may seem wildly implausible, but it might actually be a reality in 15 years.

I agree with everyone who's posted so far, though. My position comes, ironically, from my religious beliefs though. I think we shouldn't play God when it comes to the fate of our children. At the same time, I think that many of the parents who obsess about changing their children's sexuality to hetero are not doing so out of bigotry; they probably just want the best for their kids and are letting normal parental concern turn too extreme.

Thanks for all your feedback, it's been a question in my mind for quite some time. Anyone else who has further thoughts, please feel free to add!

J

[orpheus_lost]

To change a child's sexual orientation would be to change that child's entire being. Who knows what side effects would come from such a monstrous influence in genetic makeup? The sad thing is, the time is coming relatively soon when this will be happening. It honestly frightens me.

Of course, we'll all get to see the religious right spinning like a tornado trying to convince us that stem cell research is evil but the genetic altering of sexual orientation is "God's Will". What fun times these are. :(

[CountryLover]

Absolutely Positively NOT.

Like you Johnny, my viseral reaction comes from my religious beliefs - it's not up to us to play God! That's not to say we can't use wisdom in our medical treatments, but something like this?

It would be like saying....oops, wifeepoo is pregnant with another boy, and we really want a girl, so we're gonna have the good doctor do a prenatal surgery and remove his male parts.

Excuse me?? Who are we to say what/who that child should be?

PS Congratulations on the safe arrival of the new member of your family Johnny ;)

[CherryBlossom74]

The first time I ever encountered something as strange a question as this was when I read the Forever War. Back in the 1970's they thought that homosexuality and bisexuality was a learned thing, a useful trait for controlling the population. I hear it near constantly from those with brains mired in the 1950's. At the end of the book, two repeat characters are "cured" and able to at last get together and reproduce.

The entire idea is an odd one, one I cannot help but question from the ground up.

First, what proof do we have it's a disease or disorder? Since it cannot be proven then any "cure" becomes a Nietzchian attempt at ethnic and social purging from birth.

Second, what right would we have to question a parent's decision about their children? If it was made available it would be no one's business but the parent's anyways.

Third, would anyone really care once/if we are all made straight? No one would be different or care, since what you want is what you want sexually when the hardwiring is all through. That one makes the entire point moot, don't you think?

[Avocado]

No I wouldn't. I'd be worried for them yes, with regards to bullying, and I don't think someone should be any sexuality. Oh and Johnny V tell your friend you're 0% straight, 0% gay, 100% bi and 100% queer :flag3: :flag2: :)

[Nara_lovely]

Philisophical questions are great!
Funnily enough, with a great deal of topics, there is usually a mixed bag of yes, no, maybe, and off the point responses. Interesting to see so many NO's in one hit!

I read an article that discussed genetically modified fruit trees, the fruit no longer contained seeds. There was a lot of concern that if all 'original' fruit trees were wiped out, we'd have to rely solely on the scientifically modified breed stock...which was designed to not breed. It went on to exclaim the disaster of little 'real food' and the consequences to humans.
Later, another small article that stated, the fruit trees that were designed and modified to produce seedless fruit....were now producing fruit with seeds again! Scientists were baffled.

I figure: nature has a way of beating anything a scientist can do. Mother nature has had a hell of a lot more practice, and always seems to find her way.
So.....why not the human species too? No matter what genetic modifications (and I am absolutely against the idea!!) I think human nature will find a way.

[Sparks]

God created diversity on this planet for a purpose. It's called love. From black to white and all the shades inbetween, str8, bi, gay, celebate, God's mission for each of us is happiness. I'm happy with my life, and happy for my children, regadless of orientataion. Thank you Lord. :2cents:

[ScifiBiJen]

A movie was released on LOGO and DVD recently that dealt with a similar topic. A pharmaceutical company began testing a pill that would make a gay person straight. While this is obviously a very touchy subject, the movie was really well done in how it showed various reactions to this, changes in relationships, and included a lot of mention of sexual fluidity and bisexuality.

It's called "Hard Pill" if anyone wants to look it up. It's on IMDB and you can buy it on this webpage (http://www.tlavideo.com/details/product_details.cfm?id=229262&v=2&sn=1&enable=true)


:flag1:

[jo69guy]

NO, children should be who they are, not what we want them to be. If being gay/bi makes them happy, then they should have that option. I do wish the world was more tolerant though, especially where children are concerned. :2cents: :bipride:

[JohnnyV]

Jen,

Thanks for that link. Is that the TLA video in Philadelphia? I'm going to try to buy it and post something about it after I see it.

For me there is a difference between the "Hard Pill" and the idea of prenatal treatment. I have no objection to adults who've gotten tired of the gay lifestyle and want to try changing scenes... I don't even think they need a pill to do it. They just need to meet new people, try dating the opposite sex, and see if it works. While some bi and gay folks detest the Ex-Gay Movement, I think of ex-gays as bisexuals who are trying to get too much media attention for making a basic change in lifestyle that lots of people make without the fanfare (okay, you dropped guys and met a nice girl -- big f****** deal!) I don't think of ex-gays as horrible people threatening sexual freedom, the way some writers like Dan Savage paint them. But I'll try to see the film.

With fetuses, babies, and small children, the question is more fateful -- are you "protecting" a child from later hardship the way you would put erithromycin in its eyes at birth to prevent blindness, or the way you would give vitamins to make sure he or she grows as tall as possible? People get their children braces to straighten their teeth and circumcise newborn boys so they won't feel "out of place" or "self-conscious" later. Would it be a gift to get the kid a few shots at birth to straighten his or her sexual orientation?

I think the debate will become more intriguing as scientists get caught between two prerogatives. Many pro-gay people want science to unlock the code and prove that genes and hormones combine to make people gay or straight; lots of homosexuals insist they have always felt they were "born" gay and they feel that a scientific cause would entitle them to broader legal protection. But at the same time, any science that can help prove gayness is biologically natural can also be turned against homosexuality, because profit-driven researchers could market a sort of sexual vaccine to anxious parents. "For just $450, and three painless treatments, we can ensure that your baby will never have to struggle with the pain of homosexuality..."

I just survived the barrage of commercialism that every parent goes through before a first child is born. People have a way of preying on your fears to get you to spend a fortune on banking cord blood, safety latches, hypo-allergenic clothes, breastfeeding vitamins....... While my question seems outlandish, it really feels like something I can see happening within my lifetime.

Maybe my real question, with which I've struggled through my gay male friends (I have lots of gay buddies), is this:

Is it wrong to state that for some people, homosexuality is simply impractical? Not religiously "sinful" or psychologically abnormal in some heteronormative sense, but rather, just a lifestyle that adds otherwise unnecessary difficulties? My gay friends have much harder times finding relationships, get depressed more often, deal with harsher discrimination than I encounter, have had to move from city to city to find a gay-friendly neighborhood, and are -- as they will openly admit -- often unhappy with their lives.

One of my closest gay male friends once said to me, "figuring out that you weren't gay was the best thing that ever happened to you" -- and when he said it, his tone was a mix of envy, vicarious happiness, and hostility. But even so, he's said many times that he wishes someone could have made him straight at birth so he wouldn't have to suffer the way he has.

Personally, I don't believe that sexual orientation is caused by genes or hormones. Maybe there's some biological influence, but I think that it's more spiritual. I believe God has a plan for every person born. For some, that plan is to be the one who must challenge society by challenging society's sexual assumptions.

For others who believe that it is purely biological, though, I think the debate will be harder to resolve.

It's fascinating, at any rate, to see that so many people answered NO to the question... Maybe I've cheated by posting the question on a bisexual forum!!!! (Duh!)

J

[Nara_lovely]

Sometimes.....if the question is reversed....can open up a new perspective.
Whould you "make" your child homosexual as opposed to "cure"?

Just asking the hypothetical.....ok

[JohnnyV]

Nara,

If I knew my daughter were going to live in a place with many more women than men, yes, maybe I'd nudge her toward lesbianism.

J

[BiBiologist]

Interesting that most everyone is looking at this from the parental side, though a few have also noted they are happy to be what they are. I have long wished I could have been straight, because I like fitting in and being a part of greater mainstream society. I think though, if there were complete societal acceptance, then of course it wouldn't matter what anyone's orientation was. We have to consider though, that most of us posting here are bi or close to a bi person, and tend basically to understand and accept ourselves. You might get more "yes" answers from heterosexuals who would really fear having a bi/gay child. So, (sorry) I have to go back to looking for more science to counteract the false idea that bi- and homosexuality are a disease or disorder, and prove what I believe is true, which is that they represent genetic diversity. Genetic diversity is a good thing in populations. So, here is what I hope for in the future: that any attempts to manipulate natural human genetic diversity (like trying to "build" babies with the perfect eyes, noses, IQs, etc.), will be outlawed, and therefore all human forms must be accepted in society and all treated equally. I can dream, can't I?

P.S., so my answer would be no.

[Lisa (va)]

Another resounding no. I am perfectly happy to have a healthy child. More important to me is that she be the best person she can be, not the sex of the person she will eventually fall in love with. I will instill in her the value of treating others as you would wish to be treated.

Lisa

hugs n kisses

[red_riding_hood_27]

I guess I will be the first! I am not sure what way I stand. One part of me says yes I would. I would agree though that we don't know if changing that one gentic gene would affect the others. Perhaps changing sexual orientation might effect them in behavioral aspecs in life. The child might not be able to socialize like all the rest of the kids. And the teasing will still be there because they don't fit in. I don't know if I would be first in line for the "cure" or the gentic testing to see if the child was homosexual. But I won't deny that I would seriously think on it and discuss it with my husband.

I know this might upset some. However this is an honest answer to this question.

Angela

[OralBradley]

What's to cure? Homosexuality has been a part of the human condition at least since there have been any written records. It wouldn't be mentioned in the bible had it not existed when a group of semetic nomads decided to settle down and wrote out their oral history as the absolute "word" of their god.
Cultural anthropologists allude to homosexuality and other "negative" traits as being "species survival positive functioned." Left-handedness, from which we get "gauche" and "sinister," nd their opposites "dexterous" and "adroit," are one example. They were an advantage to a group of small homonids hunting much larger game.
While I might not wish homosexuality on anyone in this very homophobic society, I most certainly would NOT use in-utero genetic modification or any other way to prevent a fetus or child from being homosexual. While changing that particular bitof DNA what other changes might occur? Post-natal "training" is nothing by hocum and cruelty.
FYI, I am 77 and bisexual, have a niece who is lesbian and nearing 60, and a grandson who is gay and in his early 20s. All three of us are well above the norm in general intelligence.

[canuckotter]

My gay friends have much harder times finding relationships, get depressed more often, deal with harsher discrimination than I encounter, have had to move from city to city to find a gay-friendly neighborhood, and are -- as they will openly admit -- often unhappy with their lives. My gay friends, on the other hand, have largely lived fantastic lives. They've found powerful, enduring friendships, plenty of sex when desired ;) , and a strong and close-knit community to belong to. Honestly, among my friends, the gay folks are generally happier than the bi folks, who are in turn generally happier than the straight folks -- especially among my single friends.

[tatooedpunk]

I Have a son h'es only 2 at the moment but he will grow and develop opinions and feelings those will be his choice. Not like cancer which if you could you would immunise against.

[Whippersnap]

There is no way I would have allowed someone to change any part of my children. And as far as the idiots who think being bi and/or gay is a learned trait? If it is I am very happy to have learned that lesson when I was in H.S. and I wish I could have majored in it in college. I enjoyed being bi as a young man. I was never without a date and never had the frustrations that gays and straights had or have in their lives.

[Rainahblue]

Mrs. F said,
There will always be something that people will discriminate against.
I'm Black, Polyamorous, Bi, Female, Short, and plump. Take your pick of what to discriminate against!:cutelaugh
If my parents had chosen to "immunize" me from any of that, I guess I'd be non-existent since I feel that all of those things make up who I am. The idea of altering someone before they're born seems so morally wrong to me. I don't even like the "super baby" theory - someday choosing your child's iq, eye color, height... :(

[DarkwaterUK]

I often wonder if my bisexuality is a matter of nature or nurture. I was sexually abused by men as a young child 6 - 16, and not by any members of my own family. I'm now 46 and actively interested in other men whilst being in a 28 year happy marriage. From 16 to 37 - 37 being the age when I decided to deal with the abuse issues I never even thought about being with a man in a sexual way. It is when I decided to deal with the abuse issues that I became aware of men as potential sexual partners. I'm not confused about my sexuality - I am bisexual and enjoy being bisexual........ but I do wonder if whether I had not been instructed in sexual matters with men at such an early age if I would once more be in sexual realationships with other men.

If it was a 100% certainty that sexuality was a matter strictly for a persons genes to decide I'd certainly not wish to get in the way of nature. I truely believe though that no one can have the absolute answer as to whether it is or not.

[Avocado]

I'm sorry to hear DarkWater. When I was about 7 I had sex (not penetrative) with a boy in my year and my fiancee thinks that a) he might have been abused and b) I may really be straight and if he knew what he was doing, he was abusing me. I think by now she's come to accept that whatever the reasons I am actually bi though.

[m.in.heels&hose]

NO!
i would never try to change anything about a baby (my baby or anyone elses)

they are and should be left alone and make their own decisions as to what sexual orientation they are going to choose

if given more thought to this and open the spectrum, if this drug was made available, then what? would society then turn their attention to other things "they" dont like or accept?

what if "society" notices more and more people craving a red car, will they make a drug that will change their thinking into not liking red cars anymore?

IMHO society has too much clout and is very opinionated and needs to be more open minded (alot more)

if people are not hurting anyone, and just being them selves, then why cant they just be left alone?

i'll step down from my :soapbox: now

thank you for letting me have my :2cents: worth of say here

m.in.heels&hose

[JohnnyV]

NO!
i would never try to change anything about a baby (my baby or anyone elses)

they are and should be left alone and make their own decisions as to what sexual orientation they are going to choose

if given more thought to this and open the spectrum, if this drug was made available, then what? would society then turn their attention to other things "they" dont like or accept?

what if "society" notices more and more people craving a red car, will they make a drug that will change their thinking into not liking red cars anymore?

IMHO society has too much clout and is very opinionated and needs to be more open minded (alot more)

if people are not hurting anyone, and just being them selves, then why cant they just be left alone?

i'll step down from my :soapbox: now

thank you for letting me have my :2cents: worth of say here

m.in.heels&hose

These are all very good ponts, MinHH -- more than 2 cents worth! Thanks. Thanks to everyone else who posted, too.

I'm sensing two different points that everyone has agreed on:

1) society has to change to make sexuality more acceptable, rather than trying to engineer individuals who will be accepted

2) children should be able to make a choice

Just to play devil's advocate ;) I'll say part of the burden falls on mainstream society, and part of the burden falls on the GLBT community.

Part of what makes homosexuality or bisexuality a hardship for some people (not all, of course) is the discrimination, but part of the problem is also the fact that the gay and lesbian communities themselves can be narrow-minded, heartless, and superficial.

My contact with gay males, I have to admit, leads me to say that their emphasis on physical beauty makes many people who come out of the closet miserable. They go through so many sacrifices to "be true to themselves" then they spend years without a mate because they're in "a world of 10s looking for an 11," as my buddy once put it.

Most people want their children to have happy lives -- for gay and bi kids to find happiness, society has to change as a whole, and then I think the gay and lesbian community needs to change as a whole too.

This website is a great example of how GLBT life can be improved. I've found greater support and acceptance on this website than I found in live contact with GLBT associations, out at GLBT night spots, or on gay.com.

Thank you, Drew!

J

[arana]

Obviously the majority of us will say no to this because you cannot predict how your child will handle indifference until they've had time to encounter it first hand. Each obsticle one faces only serves to make us stronger and develop character. BUT (since we're doing hypotheticals with furturistic scientists), what if there were a "cure" that they could have later in life... A lot of kids want to "fit in" and be "normal"....would you allow them to have it at a young age or how would you convince them that being themselves is so much better and/or to wait till they were old enough to make a educated choice? After all, they are suffering peer pressure, now, not later.

[wanderingrichard]

not just no, but HELL NO!!

why would anyone want to take away a persons identity? thats tantamount to cruelty and there are laws against that worldwide.

then again, think of this situation, and i do hope i'm not treading on anyone's toes or person as i postualte this; we have a child born hemaphrodite.[ happens more than you and i think, i'm told ] both sets of genitalia evident at birth. dna tests show two sets of dna intertwined in this child.. in reality this singular being should probably have been two distinct and separate people, but in fact is not.

how do we raise this being? as male or female? what gives us the right as parents or community to assign one sex or the other as dominant? arent we taking away this persons right to choose who they are, too? what happens if we the parents decide to raise the child male, only for it to decide on it's own that it's female side is more dominant and that that is what it wants to be? or nature takes totally over and ignores the hormone treatments these children must take daily and brests start to form?

too often , we see severely misguided members of [mostly christian] the clergy who think they can "cure" us from being "different". how much pressure would you think these misguided souls would put on the parents of our hypothetical child if they knew the truth of the birth?

have i been off topic? maybe just a little, but think a moment about this wild tangent i've tossed into this discussion. i think you'll find more food for thought there.
Rich

[strawberry8302]

I definitely think that's wrong. That's playing God, and the only one allowed to do that is, well, God. I would never want to choose my baby's future, I want my children to be content with themselves, and I want THEM to discover what's best for them. I don't want them to be in pain, but I cannot shield them from it. They will have to experience pain to make them better people. When people go through pain, their struggle takes on more importance, and it makes them stronger. Example? Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. He had to die in vain, but his struggle to make this world a better place surely did not.

[JohnnyV]

not just no, but HELL NO!!


how do we raise this being? as male or female? what gives us the right as parents or community to assign one sex or the other as dominant? arent we taking away this persons right to choose who they are, too? what happens if we the parents decide to raise the child male, only for it to decide on it's own that it's female side is more dominant and that that is what it wants to be? or nature takes totally over and ignores the hormone treatments these children must take daily and brests start to form?
Rich


Rich,

Not off topic at all. In fact you bring up a very good point. Maybe to be devil's advocate, :devil: I'll adopt the unpopular position (yes -- immunize!) for the sake of debate.

Isn't it the case that we *always* make decisions about our children's fate during the tender years when they are not yet able to understand the ramifications of such decisions? What if the antidote to homosexuality had to be administered early in development, before a child even understands sex?

Or, what if, as Arana says, the child could be offered the hormonal treatment at his or her most vulnerable moment -- let's say, at the age of 13, when he or she has to listen to "fag" each day at the schoolyard.

Just as with the hermaphroditic case that Richard mentions, parents might test their fetus and detect signs of possible homosexuality or bisexuality and then decide that they have to take action -- basically, to mold the child (in their minds, for his or her own good, perhaps.)

Taking off my devil's horns, I should be honest that I could never try to manipulate my baby's genetics to make him or her straight, but my objection is, as I said earlier, religious and not political. In that I think I differ a little from others who've posted. I would also not support "fixing" a hermaphrodite and raising the child male or female; if I had a hermaphrodite child, I'd probably leave its genitals intact and call him/her by a gender neutral name like Sandy or Micki.

I don't, on the other hand, necessarily grasp the argument that fixing a child's sexuality at birth is wrong for social or political reasons. If one were to treat a baby to remove any trace of homosexual tendencies, prior to the tendencies manifesting, then I suppose you're not really changing anything, you're more pre-molding, or "shaping", or "directing" the child's development. Without the religious component of saying, like Strawberry, that we can't play God, I don't feel such a strong objection to the concept of genetically enhanced heterosexuality.

Right now I'm typing on my laptop and watching my week-old baby girl sleep. When I change her diapers, she seems to smile a little as I dab oil on her buttocks and inner thighs, and it makes me wonder how much pleasure she is capable of feeling, and when, if ever, that pleasure becomes contextualized as sexual, and eventually tied to gender identity. Would it be so wrong for a parent to decide, "I want her pleasure never to cause her grief?" and therefore give her a shot to make her always *want* that kind of pleasure from a man? This online discussion has really intrigued me.

J

[gina42]

HELL NO!
i feel a child should grow up into there own person,it shouldnt matter what there sexual prefernce is but they should always be accepted and loved for who they are....

[bigregory]

Well a GAY or LESBIAN child would be certainly in need of therapy.
However a BI child could live a normal life.
Of course im kidding.
Unless your Hitler or living in the middle ages then i think we all know the right answer.
:grouphug:

[CountryLover]

JohnnyV, studies have been done that showed that newborns in the hospital nursery can tell each other's gender and react differently even at that young age.

I'm first opposed religiously, and then on a societal basis, I'm opposed to human genetic engineering/revamping people on most any level. That's a Hitler thing, only packaged in a more palatable form. NO thank you!

:2cents: Sara

[bigregory]

Well a GAY or LESBIAN child would be certainly in need of therapy.
However a BI child could live a normal life.
Of course im kidding.
Unless your Hitler or living in the middle ages then i think we all know the right answer.
:grouphug:
Ok so i read this to my wife,She said what the hell does that mean?
Hitler/middle ages???
Obviously I thought this was an easy question to answer, I guess I am wrong. When asked if she would change the fate of her unborn child she would choose to give birth to a heterosexual child only because she feels that a gay/lesbian is subject to discrimination and she would not want that for her child if she had the choice. If the child was born gay/lesbian, she wouldn't want to change that child because that is who that child is and she would just be there for them and help them deal with whatever happens.
I thought that everyone thought the same that however the child turned out is how the child turned out and that is all there is too it. :wiggle2:

[PeterH]

Hi all,

This is a very interesting question to have asked, and I will join the maybe group. I am not convinced by the 'no' arguments, and amd tempted by some of the yes arguments.
I think a good question to ask is: would I have liked my parents to give me that treatment, had they had the option??
And I will say: maybe. I think my life would have been easier had I been straight. I think the question one should ask is: does being queer cause suuffering - is it a bit of a handicap?? And I would say: yes, I sometimes experience it as such. It is making me all confused at times. I think it makes it harder for me to have intimate relationships.
So I would say yes, it probably does lead to a certain amount of suffering, and statistics show that bi's and gay people are more suicidal (plus other things).
And for these reasons, yes I would consider preventing that suffering, as any parent would do. I've gone through a depression myself, and I wouldn't want my worst enemy to go through an experience like that, let alone a child of mine.
Would it be ethical to give such a treatment?
I don't think the meddling with God's intentions is a valid argument. The consequences of this argument would also be that one shouldn't try to cure a baby that has a genetic disease.
No I'm not saying that being bi is a disease, but yes, it is a bit of a handicap. So without having formed a definite opinion on this matter I'd say, yes I'd consider such a treatment.

:2cents: , PeterH

[allbimyself]

I'm simply amazed. Alternate sexuality isn't a disease, it's an attribute, like skin/hair/eye color, handedness, etc. The comparisons to genetic defects, etc don't hold water.

This would be more comparable to black parents authorizing a procedure to make their child white. Now, if you feel that is appropriate, than I can understand supporting a decision to affect a child's sexuality. I don't see the logic but at least you'd be consistent.

[JohnnyV]

This would be more comparable to black parents authorizing a procedure to make their child white. Now, if you feel that is appropriate, than I can understand supporting a decision to affect a child's sexuality. I don't see the logic but at least you'd be consistent.

Wow, this statement really got me thinking very hard. I'm going to say something very controversial, and say, that honestly, putting aside my religious convictions, if my parents had had the chance to make me born white, they probably would have chosen to make me white, and I would have probably been grateful for that choice. I know it sounds awful! But I'm being honest :devil:

I have rarely alluded to my own racial identity on this website, but in fact, I am multiracial, with black curly hair, bronze skin, dark brown eyes, and visibly "exotic" features. My native language is also not English; I sometimes stumble on my words, even when I'm teaching, and I find myself so much more confident in the anonymity of a venue like this forum when nobody can see my traits or hear my accent.

For me, I must confess, my sexuality has not been the cause of much anguish. Most of my struggles with myself have been because of racial discrimination, especially because I suffered a great deal of racial violence in my youth. My parents still carried a lot of internalized racism also, and partly because they favored lighter-skinned siblings and cousins, I hated the way that I looked when I was a child. My mother wouldn't let me play in the sun with the white neighbors' children, for fear that I would get even darker! Heck, I hate the way that I look now. People always tell me I'm attractive, but I 've never overcome my longing for blond hair and light eyes -- I even chose Aqua Man as my avatar, when Aqua Man is the whitest of all the superheroes and the farthest from who I am. I have always been much more attracted to brunette women with brown eyes, but strangely, I've always found blond, blue-eyed men the most attractive. I think it's because with men, I am attracted to what I wish I could be myself.

I know that most African Americans, Asian Americans, and Latinos would kill me for saying what I am saying, but honestly, I don't feel that the pain of discrimination has necessarily been worth the uniqueness of growing up nonwhite. On a panoramic level, I don't believe it would be good for a society for masses of people to play God and to entirely eliminate whole subclasses of humanity through genetic engineering. But on the individual level, allbi's parallel to race has gotten me thinking. How many times, during my life, have I wished I was white?

Well, this makes me think that I need to overcome my racial self-esteem problems, because my baby obviously inherited many of my dark features, and I don't want her to grow up hating herself the way I grew up hating myself. So Allbi, thank you for figuring out the underlying dilemma. I'm going to make sure my daughter considers herself the most beautiful child in the world, even if she turns out to be a kinky-haired, brown-skinned, hairy, manly lesbian!!!!

Love,
J

[JohnnyV]

Oh,

Two great things to read/view about this topic... Toni Morrison's The Bluest Eye, and Bean's film "The Believer."

J

[PeterH]

Hi allbi,

I knew i'd be getting some fierce replies to my remarks.
I'm afraid though that you did not read what I wrote properly. I said that being queer is not a disease, but it does feel a bit like a handicap to me. You seem to have no problems with it, I'm happy for you.
I must admit that I do and research seems to indicate that I'm not alone in that. Medicine can be used to decrease suffering (but making society more accepting could be as effective). it depends on what is the real cause behind the problems that people are experiencing. It would be interesting to compare the happiness of GLBTs in societies that are more and less accepting.

Well it's been an interesting discussion so far, and I'm still undecided,
Thanks for starting this one, Johnny

PeterH

[smokey]

ursla k leguin's novel the left hand of darkness deals with the subject of fluid sexuality and gender and it puts the whole debate into an interesting light.....I won't go into it but the gest is that the qualities of the individual are transendant of gender or sexual roles we inherit or are born into. Cure a child of homosexuality? Cure them of what? Yes in this society being "cured" would definately be a benefit, but somehow I know that child would inherently know something had been done to them that made them different form what they would have been, and resent it even if they never knew what that change had been...so cure3 a child? no...I am not qualified to play god.

[allbimyself]

Peter, my reply was not entirely directed at you.

My point being that "curing" individuals to treat societal ills is not a pragmatic solution. So once we get rid of all those that are repressed for whatever reason society will be better? Not a chance. Society has to learn to deal with diversity. Removing diversity without treating the underlying cause for bigotry will only lead to narrowing views of acceptable behavior and attributes, and a new class of "unnacceptables" to be "cured" away.

That is why others have called doing this Hitlerian. Hitler was just more direct. Placing the onus on parents to make a heart wrenching decision helps obsolve those that wish these "problems" would go away of any guilt. Perhaps that makes this more cruel than lining them up against the wall and shooting them, I don't know. But it does make it more tidy, doesn't it?

Johnny, you're a filthy mongrel? OMG, I'm never talking to you again!
:bigrin:

I think part of your "racial self-esteem" problems are related to how your parents behaved. They made you ashamed of who you are, as evidenced by not letting you play in the sun for fear of you becoming darker. It's sad that that happened. It's sad that you suffered racial violence. But these are societal ills, not YOURS!

I know that many might say I can't understand what you suffered since I'm a white male in the US. That wouldn't be entirely true. For the first 13 years of my life I lived in a very rural part of Iowa. There were no blacks, no latinos, no Jews, no asians, just Christian white people. There wasn't even a problem between the Catholics and Protestants. It was the most horrible place I ever lived. Since there wasn't an obvious individual or group for folks to be bigoted against, the slightest waivering from the "norm" for that town would result in terrible humiliation, beating and estrangement. I wasn't normal.

Since leaving, I haven't had to deal with that so much, so obviously I haven't lived with such stigmatism for the length of time as you have, but for a short period of my life it was as intense, if not more so, since I was totally alone.

You'll excuse me for a moment, Johnny, I'm not a Christian anymore, so I'm going to talk about things scientifically. Humans evolved to be prejudiced. There are a lot of creatures in this world that a naked, weaponless human doesn't stand a chance against. Our smelly, hairy, cave dwelling ancestors developed a survival instinct. Fear anything that they don't understand and kill that which you fear. It's safer that way. Even though the need for that instinct is gone, people that are different trigger that instinctual response of fear in us. Fear leads to hatred. Only understanding can remove or help control the fear and hence, the hatred.

I'll admit that I'm prejudiced. When I'm around people that are "different" from those that I'm experienced with, I become nervous. It's natural. However, I recognize that it isn't acceptable to treat those people as less than human simply because of my ignorance.

More people need to learn that simple fact.

[JohnnyV]

Johnny, you're a filthy mongrel? OMG, I'm never talking to you again!
:bigrin:

I think part of your "racial self-esteem" problems are related to how your parents behaved. They made you ashamed of who you are, as evidenced by not letting you play in the sun for fear of you becoming darker. It's sad that that happened. It's sad that you suffered racial violence. But these are societal ills, not YOURS!

More people need to learn that simple fact.


Allbi,

Don't worry, some of my best friends are pale-faced cornhusking crackers... (sarcasm, of course, just in case readers don't get the irony). I won't hold it against you that you're from Tim McVeigh country.

About the problem of societal "ills," I don't blame my parents as much as I blame a long, racist history that has affected the whole world. Unfortunately, much of America's security and prosperity was built on extorting land, labor, and resources from people who weren't white, based on the fact that they weren't white. I know, I know -- "every empire in history has done it" blah blah blah -- but the fact is that the US has to answer to its past the way that the Third Reich, Victorian England, Rome, and every other imperial conqueror had to answer to their pasts. Race will, I believe, be America's Achilles heel.

The best evidence of America's racial psychosis is the current frenzy to build a wall between Mexico and the United States to protect the homeland, when the only actual terror cell in the US was found in Lackawanna, New York, five minutes from an enormous porous border with Canada. Why the panic about Mexico and the calm about Canada? One country is Spanish-speaking, mostly nonwhite, and Catholic; the other country is mostly Anglopphone, white, and Protestant.

J. Edgar Hoover was convinced that homosexuals posed a threat to American security during the Cold War. The paranoid folks of the 21st century are convinced that foreign skin colors, accents, and "way of life" (a euphemism for all sorts of eugenics arguments) are the threat to our safety.

My parents were truly the product of a cultural colonial system that taught them to shun anything dark and worship anything white. Very tragic.

Sexuality is not entirely the same, but I do see the parallels. The problem is that I think many more parents would willingly reprogram their gay children to be straight, than would willingly reprogram brown children to be white. Gayness hits on all sorts of guilt, morality, and reproductive issues that make the "cure" for homosexuality for a little more thinkable to people than the "cure" for racial difference.

Remember, please, that I am putting the "cure" in scare quotes. The quotes are there to let you know that I'm being slightly ironic!

Love,
J

[usedbear1950]

Obviously the majority of us will say no to this because you cannot predict how your child will handle indifference until they've had time to encounter it first hand. Each obsticle one faces only serves to make us stronger and develop character. BUT (since we're doing hypotheticals with furturistic scientists), what if there were a "cure" that they could have later in life... A lot of kids want to "fit in" and be "normal"....would you allow them to have it at a young age or how would you convince them that being themselves is so much better and/or to wait till they were old enough to make a educated choice? After all, they are suffering peer pressure, now, not later.

You bring up a good point Arana. I suppose that when a child reaches the' age of reason' or in civil matters 'legal age' they can choose for themselves. I would striclty limit any fetus alteration to disease and even then I have reservations. Think of the people who overcame their afflications to achieve greatness. Steven Hawking, FDR, Toulouse Lautrec to name a few.
And sexual orientation is not a disease, though some would cast it such. It is a preference that comes from free will and that is god given.

ur ever luvin
usedbear

[allbimyself]

Don't worry, some of my best friends are pale-faced cornhusking crackers...ROFLMWAO


I won't hold it against you that you're from Tim McVeigh country.
OMG, now you've gone too far!


About the problem of societal "ills," I don't blame my parents as much as I blame a long, racist history that has affected the whole world. Unfortunately, much of America's security and prosperity was built on extorting land, labor, and resources from people who weren't white, based on the fact that they weren't white. I know, I know -- "every empire in history has done it" blah blah blah -- but the fact is that the US has to answer to its past the way that the Third Reich, Victorian England, Rome, and every other imperial conqueror had to answer to their pasts. Race will, I believe, be America's Achilles heel.Sorry, didn't mean that to sound like a judgment of your parents. Just trying to point out a cause and effect.

Well, unfortunately, I don't see a way too answer for it. What would you suggest? (does that sound like a challenge? LOL)



Sexuality is not entirely the same, but I do see the parallels. The problem is that I think many more parents would willingly reprogram their gay children to be straight, than would willingly reprogram brown children to be white. Gayness hits on all sorts of guilt, morality, and reproductive issues that make the "cure" for homosexuality for a little more thinkable to people than the "cure" for racial difference.
I think the difference in willingness is twofold. First, being "of color" is not as stigmatic as being of alternate sexuality. Second, parents considering a procedure to prevent non-heterosexuality are probably NOT gay, but the parents of black children ARE black.

Whatever the manifestation of bigotry it still stems from fear and ignorance AND that fear is fed by politicians and religious leaders all over the world, often for their own personal gain. I understand that, being Americans, we tend to look at the problems here. Unfortunately, there is a tendency to make the US out to be a special form of evil. This stuff happens everywhere.

Whomever is the "scape goat du jour" the underlying cause needs to be treated.

[JohnnyV]

Well, unfortunately, I don't see a way too answer for it. What would you suggest? (does that sound like a challenge? LOL)


My main suggestion is to admit the truth about the past rather than trying to sugarcoat it, or attacking people when they point out some basics, like, for instance, the fact that a whole lot of Indians had to die for America to become what it is now, that millions of slaves died in the Middle Passage....

Once you have an accurate and (even if painful) honest account of where our country came from, I think it's easier to avoid the same pitfalls over and over again. When I hear people preaching against China's economic inroads, or the outsourcing of jobs to India, or Mexican laborers stealing people's jobs, etc. -- there is some truth to the anxieties, but many layers of irrational racism heaped on top. Those layers are dangerous and lead to dangerous overreactions, often making the problems worse. (Shoot me for saying so, but I actually agree with Bush on the approach to illegal immigrants; it's far better to give them guest worker visas and make them legal, rather than turn America into a police state to purge them.)

That's the best way to answer to the past. Other than that, you have to bow to the power of history and forces beyond our control. America became great through a mix of good ideas and ruthless racial aggression -- if the problems implanted by our history lead to an eventual decline, much like Spain's in the 17th and 18th centuries, for example, than we will have to "answer to the past" by accepting a future that we can't control. Instead of trying to sandbag China or invade Iran to stop our own country from going downhill, maybe we have to let go of some of our superpower dreams, and become more laid back. A Spanish friend of mine spoke about her country's past grandeur by saying "pues, a la patria ya se le fue su epoca."

You are, as usual, wonderfully on target about the differences between sexual and racial taboos.

I've enjoyed this thread! Very good discussion. Now I have to run and do many, many tasks for the next few days, so if I disappear and don't answer some later posts, it's not because I'm not going to read them. I just have some deadlines to meet and this website is too fun -- it keeps me distracted!

With love and diaper oil,
J

[allbimyself]

OK, I see what you meant now and I'm in total agreement. Thought you were going down a different path that I didn't agree with :eek:

[citystyleguy]

a good question to which, if posted widely, would generate more of what we have read, plus a seemingly endless series of assualts with what the issuer would think are all very plausible and supportable truths.

let me play an inverse devils advocate! let us ferret out this geneic trait of hetrosexuality; let us have the myriad variations of differencies be free of these opinionated conformists. would this be a happier world? doubt it, as groups form around all sorts of commonalities to ostrasize what ever differences that are chosen.

a great many people would support this ability, just as eugenicists(sp?) at the turn of the century thought that through scientific means they could rid the world of inferior qualities, races, and deformities, but that failed utterly! all these then-chosen traits of supposed inferiority are still with us today!

we, who walk the paths of these other qualities, natural instincts, etc., can be thankful and rejoice that science is far more complex than to allow such simplistic and false solutions. predjudices and ridicule will be with humanity as long as those of us that are different from the norm fail to stand fast, not accept these false truths, fight head-on against ignorance, intolerance, and indifference.

for me, my child will never have to question what they are, but understand it, come to terms with it, and eventually accept it as their individulistic
trait(s). this will not keep them free from general harrassment, but they will be able to look them in the eye and hold the accuser accountable.

may all of you go in peace,

citystyleguy

[BI BOYTOY]

my thoughts are a big NO on that one we have 2 kids and we would love them and acsept them how ever they turn out. its not up to us to play god.

[arana]

Wow, this statement really got me thinking very hard. I'm going to say something very controversial, and say, that honestly, putting aside my religious convictions, if my parents had had the chance to make me born white, they probably would have chosen to make me white, and I would have probably been grateful for that choice. I know it sounds awful! But I'm being honest :devil:

I have rarely alluded to my own racial identity on this website, but in fact, I am multiracial, with black curly hair, bronze skin, dark brown eyes, and visibly "exotic" features. My native language is also not English; I sometimes stumble on my words, even when I'm teaching, and I find myself so much more confident in the anonymity of a venue like this forum when nobody can see my traits or hear my accent.

For me, I must confess, my sexuality has not been the cause of much anguish. Most of my struggles with myself have been because of racial discrimination, especially because I suffered a great deal of racial violence in my youth. My parents still carried a lot of internalized racism also, and partly because they favored lighter-skinned siblings and cousins, I hated the way that I looked when I was a child. My mother wouldn't let me play in the sun with the white neighbors' children, for fear that I would get even darker! Heck, I hate the way that I look now. People always tell me I'm attractive, but I 've never overcome my longing for blond hair and light eyes -- I even chose Aqua Man as my avatar, when Aqua Man is the whitest of all the superheroes and the farthest from who I am. I have always been much more attracted to brunette women with brown eyes, but strangely, I've always found blond, blue-eyed men the most attractive. I think it's because with men, I am attracted to what I wish I could be myself.

I know that most African Americans, Asian Americans, and Latinos would kill me for saying what I am saying, but honestly, I don't feel that the pain of discrimination has necessarily been worth the uniqueness of growing up nonwhite. On a panoramic level, I don't believe it would be good for a society for masses of people to play God and to entirely eliminate whole subclasses of humanity through genetic engineering. But on the individual level, allbi's parallel to race has gotten me thinking. How many times, during my life, have I wished I was white?

Well, this makes me think that I need to overcome my racial self-esteem problems, because my baby obviously inherited many of my dark features, and I don't want her to grow up hating herself the way I grew up hating myself. So Allbi, thank you for figuring out the underlying dilemma. I'm going to make sure my daughter considers herself the most beautiful child in the world, even if she turns out to be a kinky-haired, brown-skinned, hairy, manly lesbian!!!!

Love,
J
I can totally relate to what you're saying Johnny. With my mixture I could burn crosses on my own front lawn. Growing up I hated being multiracial because even though I was half white I was never accepted as one. I was always the minority of the minorities so I was picked on all the way around.
I hope your daughter never has to experience the cruelty that some people can dole out. Even those who mean well can say some horrid things. My aunt use to see mixed couples with their children and say "How can they bring a child into this world that is mixed raced. That's just not right." which didn't do a lot for my self esteem. At least your daughter has good parents that can teach her well.

[arana]

OK, I see what you meant now and I'm in total agreement. Thought you were going down a different path that I didn't agree with :eek:
You are, as usual, wonderfully on target about the differences between sexual and racial taboos.

I've enjoyed this thread! Very good discussion. Now I have to run and do many, many tasks for the next few days, so if I disappear and don't answer some later posts, it's not because I'm not going to read them. I just have some deadlines to meet and this website is too fun -- it keeps me distracted!

With love and diaper oil,
J
Ok, now that you two are done with foreplay, do you need a room? :tong:

[APMountianMan]

Here's a bizarre philosophical question:

If science developed a way to treat a pregnant woman so that the baby would come out heterosexual, would you "immunize" your baby from turning out gay or bi?

We love our children and don't want them to suffer discrimination or pain, so maybe it would be natural to want to make sure they come out heterosexual.

But on the other hand, I believe God makes people the way they are for a reason, and I, as the father of a week-old newborn, could never imagine trying to change my baby's destiny.

Anyone have any thoughts?

J


Today, I saw an amazing thing at Walmart: two teen boys walking hand in hand, obviously as boyfriend and boyfriend. I was first proud of their courage, their unpretentious show of affection. Secondly, I was also proud that no one scowled or pointed or grabbed their children and ran screaming from the store.

To cure implies that there is an illness, a disease. I don’t believe that homosexuality is an illness, there for the answer to the question is no. I would rather live in a world where to people, no matter what their sexes can walk hand in hand in Walmart than a world that would try to cure those same people of loving one another.


:cool:

[APMountianMan]

Today, I saw an amazing thing at Walmart: two teen boys walking hand in hand, obviously as boyfriend and boyfriend. I was first proud of their courage, their unpretentious show of affection. Secondly, I was also proud that no one scowled or pointed or grabbed their children and ran screaming from the store.

To cure implies that there is an illness, a disease. I don’t believe that homosexuality is an illness, therefore the answer to the question is no. I would rather live in a world where two people, no matter what their sexes, can walk hand in hand in Walmart than in a world that would try to cure those same people of loving one another.


Someone remind me not to reply when I am exhausted. Sorry for the earlier typos

:cool:

[JohnnyV]

AP Mountain Man,

You are forgiven for your typos!

I think it's inspiring to see two boys walking hand in hand in Walmart. Though I should add one little point to that :devil: When I was in my late teens I went through a rebellious stage where I would do things like that to get attention, similar to the way that straight teen couples will get hot and heavy in public places as a way to draw attention to themselves. I am glad that people didn't scowl; it shows the tolerance of the adults. But the behavior of the kids could be teen love or just immature rebelliousness, one never knows. At any rate, I wish I could believe that babies being born today will live in a world totally tolerant of homosexual and heterosexual relations equally, and a world in which both homo and hetero people have an equal chance at feeling happy, fulfilled, and content. I'm not sure I believe it.... Then again, part of me is an optimist.

J

[JohnnyV]

Ok, now that you two are done with foreplay, do you need a room? :tong:

LMAO -- Allbi's posts are so sexy I'd do him in public.

And Arana, the joke about "I'm so mixed I could burn crosses in my own front lawn" had me rolling on the floor.

Love,
J

[allbimyself]

LMAO -- Allbi's posts are so sexy I'd do him in public. :eek: :eek:

Hey now, I'm a modest person....

[JohnnyV]

:eek: :eek:

Hey now, I'm a modest person....


:bounce: :bounce:

Modest people are the wildest when you get them out of their shell.

[tomcee]

hi, this is my first post. I've thought about this question before since I live in a very bible-belt kind of place. What most people don't realize is that this technology cuts both ways, i.e. gay lesbian couples etc. could use it to make sure that their children are gay ( or bi I suppose), so for every straight person making sure they didn't have to deal with a gay child there would be a gay/leb/bi person making sure they didn't have to deal with an exclusively straight child.

[JohnnyV]

Tomcee,

That's an interesting point. Do you think if given the choice, most gays and lesbian parents would choose to make their kids gay?

J

[wildangel]

I think there would be some gay couples choosing to make their children gay, just as there would be some hetero couples choosing to make their children straight.

Me personally-I would love my child the same homo- or hetero-sexual. I refuse to predetermine any aspect of their personality or physique.

I grew up in a very non-understanding household. My sister and I are both bisexual and have endured lots of criticism from our family because of it. But I'm sure neither one of us would ever choose to be straight because it has made us the people we are today.

[JohnnyV]

I have to confess that I began this thread partly because I've been doing a lot of research into the World War II era for a comparative global study, dealing with fascism. It has been interesting to see how in the 1930s and 1940s, all around the world nations struggled with a similar fascistic desire to control populations and people's basic characteristics, down to the minutest detail. The decision by the Nazis to send homosexuals to concentration camps grew out of the urge, common to many countries at the time, to mold a society by weeding out whatever that society didn't want or couldn't deal with.

One scholar of the Third Reich called the Nazi dream "a utopian fantasy." Another scholar says that fascism is characterized by the desire to extend governing power beyond the law into culture itself or, as the writer says, "to legislate culture and social relations using the coercive power of the state." No fascist would have ever said that fascism was violent, genocidal, or warlike. Rather, they believed that fascism promised an end to conflict and disorder, and they thought it would bring them a perfect peace. With hindsight, we know how stupid such a self-perception was, but at the time, it made sense to the followers of Hitler, Mussolini, and Hirohito.

My studies, as well as the discussion on this thread, lead me to believe that utopianism of any kind is extremely dangerous. Whenever you dream of a perfect society without unpleasantness, there is always the risk of turning into a Nazi. It is easy to fall into the trap without understanding the harsher ramifications of one's belief system. When Rick Santorum says, on the Senate floor, that he is fighting against gay marriage because he wants every home to feel the way he feels when he tucks his children into bed, that's the deadly utopianism lurking. But on the other hand, when gay and lesbian activists say that they are fighting for a world in which, as one writer has said, "women and children will no longer be destroyed because men marry rather than come out of the closet," they are ALSO falling into a destructive utopianism. To want to erase the bisexual or the closet case, which is so often a central aim of gay and lesbian rhetoric, is also dangerous and points to a fascistic desire to regiment sexuality.

I wanted to just restate that I put the "cure" in scare quotes because I was being consciously ironic. I agree with everyone on here that homosexuality is not a disease and can't be cured, no matter how hard we try. But I wanted to thank everyone on here for this discussion, since it helped a lot with the lectures I'm preparing, and I may alllude to some things folks brought up, when I deliver them.

J

[12voltman59]

I would not presume to try to influence the sexual preference of my children--(if I ever have any) for I don't believe that it is anything that I could influence them about.

They would have to find their own way in such a thing.

The one thing I would try to influence them on is the way they conduct themselves in terms of the their relationships-namely that they do not jump from one relationship to another. I would warn them of the pitfalls of living life in a promiscuous fashion-that whether they love men, women or both--they should practice due care and moderation in their lovemaking.

I would point out the emotional and physical toll that promiscuity can lead to--but not do it from a preachy position. I would point out the facts in this regard and hope that in all other ways, I have given them a sound foundation in many ways and chief among them--that they were loved and wanted children.

I think that this lack of such knowledge is a main reason people constantly seek the sensations of the physical aspect of sex--trying to fill up the void they feel at the core of their being---misstaking the physical aspects of lovemaking for meaningful and true love; love that is sustaining, nuturing and positive.

[tink1978]

I am a mother of two wonderful boys and when they grow up all we ask is that they find love. Be it with a woman or man or both just be happy. We also lost our youngest due to a blood clot at 15 days old (my last pregnancy was identical twins) with that said baby's have a hard enough time just trying to grow and develop all that they need to survive in this world for man to go and meddle with it. And for something to be "cured" there would have to be something wrong or "deceased". Homosexuality is not either. :flag2:

[Apleasureseeker]

YES!
OK, just kidding. got your attention. I think that people should go the way their heart dictates.

BUT

Recently I've seen more & more young folks feeling comprelled to "come out" about their sexual identity, often way before they've even fully developed one. I've known people who were the victim of involuntary same-sex sexual encounters, and believed that it made them gay or bi. One of the advantages of hetero-domination is that it gives a person time to be & discover, since it's assumed that they are straight unless they say otherwise. Without the assumption, there's more pressure to commit one way or the other. Lots of kids play doctor & masturbate together, but it doesn't really mean anything. Just exploration.

[JohnnyV]

Recently I've seen more & more young folks feeling comprelled to "come out" about their sexual identity, often way before they've even fully developed one. I've known people who were the victim of involuntary same-sex sexual encounters, and believed that it made them gay or bi. One of the advantages of hetero-domination is that it gives a person time to be & discover, since it's assumed that they are straight unless they say otherwise. Without the assumption, there's more pressure to commit one way or the other. Lots of kids play doctor & masturbate together, but it doesn't really mean anything. Just exploration.

Pleasure seeker, you bring up a great point; thank you. Recent data suggests that people are coming out much earlier than other generations, with some people already calling themselves gay or lesbian by the age of 13 or 14, in effect assuming that identity before high school. Some debate has taken place about whether to have entire high schools for gay and lesbian students, largely because of the phenomenon of what I will call "early bloomers."

I'm not necessarily wedded to my viewpoint, but for now I think that those ages are in fact too early. Maybe some people really know, instinctively, what they are by the age of 12 or so, but many other people will probably have to change their identity later on. The years from age 14 to about 25 are so unpredictable.

My theory for the rise in "early bloomers" is threefold. First, I think our culture is itself sexualizing children earlier and earlier, so children (I have to call 12-year-olds children) who identify early as gay are following the cues from heterosexual culture, which encourages 12-year-old girls to experiment with oral sex and wear provocative clothing already by that age.

Second, I think that the Internet has made it possible for children to access materials about homosexuality that really aren't designed for their level of sexual development. It is common on gay-themed websites for homosexuals to say things like "I knew I was gay from the time I was 3 years old." For some people, this may be true. But for an adult to say that, as a retrospective, is quite different from suggesting to a 12-year-old that he can already know what he is. Many children who are bored and curiously surfing the Internet probably come across such snippets and become impatient to find a label for themselves, much in the way that 15-year-olds can't wait to get their driver's license.

Third, some research by school psychologists has shown that schoolyard bullying and taunting now revolves almost entirely around classmates calling each other gay. One Pittsburgh newspaper reported that 76% of 12 to 17 year olds in a national survey had personally witnessed an act of violence against a student in the previous year, involving an insult related to gayness (faggot, homo, queer, etc.) I teach at college, not at high school, but my exposure to adolescents makes me think that sometimes effeminate boys or tomboyish girls are sometimes called anti-gay names so early on, that they embrace that identity as a self-protective countermeasure in order to get through high school. If you are a 12-year-old boy, bad at sports, with a high voice and a girlish walk, and you get called a faggot by assholes on the school bus every day for months, it would be a consolation to say, "yes, I am gay," and decide that you aren't going to try to compete for girls. Trying to compete for girls would expose such a boy to more ridicule and physical danger. If there is some homoerotic tendency in you at that tender age, you may very well emphasize it in your mind as a coping mechanism. And if you are in that mental space for a few years, you could easily ride out your reactive gay identity into the age range when gay youth organizations will accept you and offer you some social protection -- while also demanding that you maintain a strictly gay identity.

Anyway, I think all the reasons for early bloomers are BAD reasons. Reason #1 makes young people sexualize themselves before they can learn about mutual respect and love; in the case of young gay-identified men, it may encourage them to be sexually active before they understand the rules of safe sex.

Reason #2 may cause youth to jump the gun a little, and might make it necessary for them to do what I had to do in my early 20s -- have a "second coming out" when you announce to the world that you've changed your mind and aren't gay, but rather bisexual, and now want to start dating the opposite sex.

Reason #3 causes kids to link their gay identity to being victimized and will forever make them feel that their sexuality was forced on them. That can't be healthy for the relationships that they will develop within the identity they assume.

Now, I had a great debate in my class about the question of "early bloomers," when I taught Walt Whitman to 40 college freshmen. Surprisingly, most of the college students prefer their classmates to come out as early as possible. One boy said he got angry at a friend for coming out at the age of 19, because he would liked to have known about the homosexuality, so that he could have avoided doing things like skinny dipping together. "The fact that he saw me naked makes me want to kick his ass for keeping it secret," was the way my student put it.

The students who agreed with me, that people shouldn't come out as gay until they are at least in their 20s and are fully aware of themselves, agreed with me because they said they would want their friends to be really sure they were gay before they told everyone. They were in the minority however, since most of the class wanted to know who, of their friends, was gay or straight, from as early as 7th grade; otherwise they would feel betrayed and duped.

But one very articulate student, an 18-year-old girl, told me that she disagreed with my view for very practical reasons. I'll never forget what she said:

"If my friend says he's gay when he's 15, he can always change his mind later, and I'll support him. But if he waits until he's 30 to say it, he may never get the chance to live the gay lifestyle, and then he'll be bitter for the rest of his life, even if he ends up not being gay."

That was about the wisest thing I've ever heard on the topic.

Love,
J

[Driver 8]

It is common on gay-themed websites for homosexuals to say things like "I knew I was gay from the time I was 3 years old." For some people, this may be true. But for an adult to say that, as a retrospective, is quite different from suggesting to a 12-year-old that he can already know what he is.
The lesbian writer Alison Bechdel once wrote that when she was a child, she knew she was different, but at the time she thought it was because she was smart. When I read that I wanted to say "Ms. Bechdel, it probably was because you were smart."

Kierkegaard said that life is understood backwards, but lived forward. It seems to me that we often impose a plot on life - we look for reasons for our actions, we see ourselves as having triumphed or failed - but we're very selective about it. We downplay the things that don't fit into the way we have come to see ourselves now. We try to make sense out of our lives by turning them into a story that makes sense to us. And I think that's what's happening with so many people's misty memories of a childhood where they "always knew" - it's so much more comfortable than recalling being an adolescent and having no idea. :2cents:

[JohnnyV]

Driver 8,

I apologize I missed this note you posted at the end of the thread. That was a beautiful statement. Thank you and Kierkegaard.

J

[twodelta]

This Thread has really provided food for thought! A few sub-topics that are very interesting and deserving of dicussion. But for now, I'll only deal with the original topic, if I could guarantee hetrosexuality for my unborn child, what would my choice be? I would not, but not for the reasons that most have voiced. When I started thinking about this subject, I imediately thought about one of my favorite classic movies, "It's A Wonderful Life". Yes, I realize that the main point of the movie is what effect would a person NOT being born have on the world. But I believe that asking what effect would a person being born differently have on the world is, basically the same thing. How different would the world be today had Gen. Patten grew up to be gay? Would You even be alive today if You mother were born male instead of female? How different would the US be today if J Edgar Hoover was born with strong tendencies to be a cross-dresser? OK, that was a bad example, but am I making sence to anyone but myself? Hasn't mankind messed with nature enough already? :2cents: :2cents: - Dave

[Rhuth]

I never realized what a weird place I live in until I started reading these forums. Sexual orientation is not a stigma here. You are more likely to be socked in the face for making a bigoted remark than for picking up on someone of the same sex. I have been turned down (more like headed off) by more men not interested in women than I have by women not interested in women. If a friend is interested in another friend, one of the first things they will ask is what their sexual orientation is. You just do not know until you ask, and whatever the answer is, you will be accepted.

I don’t see immunizing a child against homo or heterosexuality as a protection from the society I now live in. I see it as a fashion statement. Like skin, hair, or eye color. Like height or metabolism. I am personally done having children, so I will not have to worry about making sure my child has the latest fashionable sexual orientation. I have no doubt that my children will have to make that decision for their children if they choose to have them. I guess I have to admit that I do not feel strongly about my grandchildren being designer fashion statements. I see it as an inevitable decision for my children. It is going to happen. For better of for worse, or if nature will work itself out for humanity, we will not know until it happens.

My oldest is turning 11 next week. The schoolyard is much different now than when I was a kid. He once got teased for having a girlfriend, so he started hanging around his buddy from fencing class exclusively to head off the teasing. He then got teased by the same person for having a boyfriend! Both teasing incidences were considered equally humiliating.

I once made a comment that he was going to make some girl or guy very happy someday. (He just doesn’t fit any stereotypes. I simply can’t tell.) He looked up at me and said “Mom, I’m straight”. I was a bit taken aback. My son had to come out to me as straight. Then I found myself thinking, “How can he know that? He hasn’t even gone through puberty yet.” Is he what JohnnyV was referring to as an early bloomer?

I was most defiantly a late bloomer. I look back on instances that I was clueless about in high school, and kick myself for not realizing sooner because I missed out on what might have been some really fun sexual exploration. Both with men and with women. Er… guys and girls? Oh well. I’m making up for lost time now, and enjoying it. Good riddance to the awkward high school years!

I applaud JohnyV’s student who shows respect to the early bloomers. If a young person has the ability to articulate the way they want to be understood, they deserve to have such respect from the rest of us. So my son says he is straight. I have to resist the urge to wonder if it is a phase or if some boy will ever tempt him. He wants to be understood and related to as straight, and I will.

/Rhuth

P.S. I saw the movie ScifiBiJen referred to, “Hard Pill”. I loved how it covered this topic in an open ended way, and tried to hit on all of the arguments without concluding who’s argument was best. I also loved that every new character was introduced with where they fit on the Klein Grid. What I did not like was that the one guy who was practicing bisexuality was labeled straight, and his abusiveness in both relationships was attributed to his bisexual actions.

[JohnnyV]

I never realized what a weird place I live in until I started reading these forums. Sexual orientation is not a stigma here. You are more likely to be socked in the face for making a bigoted remark than for picking up on someone of the same sex. I have been turned down (more like headed off) by more men not interested in women than I have by women not interested in women. If a friend is interested in another friend, one of the first things they will ask is what their sexual orientation is. You just do not know until you ask, and whatever the answer is, you will be accepted.

I don’t see immunizing a child against homo or heterosexuality as a protection from the society I now live in. I see it as a fashion statement. Like skin, hair, or eye color. Like height or metabolism. I am personally done having children, so I will not have to worry about making sure my child has the latest fashionable sexual orientation. I have no doubt that my children will have to make that decision for their children if they choose to have them. I guess I have to admit that I do not feel strongly about my grandchildren being designer fashion statements. I see it as an inevitable decision for my children. It is going to happen. For better of for worse, or if nature will work itself out for humanity, we will not know until it happens.

My oldest is turning 11 next week. The schoolyard is much different now than when I was a kid. He once got teased for having a girlfriend, so he started hanging around his buddy from fencing class exclusively to head off the teasing. He then got teased by the same person for having a boyfriend! Both teasing incidences were considered equally humiliating.

I once made a comment that he was going to make some girl or guy very happy someday. (He just doesn’t fit any stereotypes. I simply can’t tell.) He looked up at me and said “Mom, I’m straight”. I was a bit taken aback. My son had to come out to me as straight. Then I found myself thinking, “How can he know that? He hasn’t even gone through puberty yet.” Is he what JohnnyV was referring to as an early bloomer?

I was most defiantly a late bloomer. I look back on instances that I was clueless about in high school, and kick myself for not realizing sooner because I missed out on what might have been some really fun sexual exploration. Both with men and with women. Er… guys and girls? Oh well. I’m making up for lost time now, and enjoying it. Good riddance to the awkward high school years!

I applaud JohnyV’s student who shows respect to the early bloomers. If a young person has the ability to articulate the way they want to be understood, they deserve to have such respect from the rest of us. So my son says he is straight. I have to resist the urge to wonder if it is a phase or if some boy will ever tempt him. He wants to be understood and related to as straight, and I will.

/Rhuth

P.S. I saw the movie ScifiBiJen referred to, “Hard Pill”. I loved how it covered this topic in an open ended way, and tried to hit on all of the arguments without concluding who’s argument was best. I also loved that every new character was introduced with where they fit on the Klein Grid. What I did not like was that the one guy who was practicing bisexuality was labeled straight, and his abusiveness in both relationships was attributed to his bisexual actions.

[severe jealousy] Yes, the Bay Area is like no other place in the world [/severe jealousy]

Someone at my gym told me that he's looking into a fertilization technology that allows the husband's sperm to be separated into X and Y sperm somehow, thereby making it possible to determine the sex of your child before conception. He is 46 and can only have one child, and he really wants it to be a boy.

I think you're right that we're getting closer to making fashion statements with our kids' genetics. Scary.

But on a more serious note, I can't believe ANYONE rebuffed advances by Rhuth, male or female. This is probably cyber-coquettishness and a shameless ploy to vaunt the goddess' beauty.

J

[dynodave77]

no i have proff , but it would take too long no one would believe me , and if
i had the money the movie would result. so every thing happens for a reason
i have had these hardles before and so have others it is up to you to sort.
you cannot play god you have to make choices then the brain cycles over
into a pateren of that choice , sometimes very hard to turn back without
medicine. i know first hand YOU WILL REPEAT OR MAKE CHANGE TO GET
ENTRY INTO HEAVEN GUARANTEE IT !!!!! REBEL WHO HAS HAD IT POKED
POPED BOPED AND KNOWS THE SPIRITUAL JOURNEY . IT IS NOT A PERFECT
WORLD AND NEATHER ARE WE , BUT YOU WILL EVOLE TO GET IN THE DOOR
WAY TO YOUR COMPLETE NESS. BAD WIRING COMES FOR A REASON DO NOT
TAMPER WITH IT IT WILL STILL COME IT IS IN THE SPIRIT ELECTRIC CODING
MAN NOR MEDICINE CAN NEVER EVER MESS WITH. LOVE DYNO

[nyabn_webmaster]

:2cents: OMG absolutely NOT!

As an "out & proud" proud bisexual (& "good" Catholic church-going . . . you know, candles, holy-water, the whole 9 . . . LOL!) "Abuela" who has "out & proud" bisexual children & now an "out & proud" (well more like "out & grumpy" she IS a teenager!) granchild the entire idea is totally repulsive and smack some sort of sick Nazi eugenics type thing, (I mean back in the day THEY were trying to either "kill or cure" people of being Jewish as well as being Gay, Lesbian, etc., etc.).

Besides don't most of the people on here think it is more convenient to be bisexual? It doesn't matter who you love, you never have to come out, go back in, whatever . . you are just bisexual!

Warmest regards,
Cynthia a co-webmaster from NYABN (http://www.nyabn.org/index.html)

[Haemoglobin]

i think its simply wrong if people would be able to decide over their childrens sexes and say - ah , i want a boy please and walllaaa the heterosexual boy comes out . . thats wrong . more i dont wanna say now , im actually tired :rolleyes:

[little clown]

Hi JohhnyV,

It seems to my that by trying to "dictate" a child's sexual orientation,
you're actually giving in to that part of society that believes
heterosexuality is the only"correct" sexual orientation.

I realize that the consequences of gay and bi discrimination can be far stretching.
I can imagine that some bi and gay people wish they were born
differently because of this.
(When I read about the abuse and/or violence and abuse that
some people encounter because they're gay or bi, I realize just
how fortunate I have been to have never experienced anything like this.)
But will being straight solve everything? No.
There will always be problems that a person has to deal with, both
as a kid and as an adult.
I believe that the best you can hope to achieve as a parent, is
to help your child become an individual whose sense of self worth
can withstand most anything.

Take care,
Dani