Choosing lesbianism.

[The Yremia Corporate]

That's nice. Not one of those tribes is without contact, or you wouldn't have been able to write your paper.

Depends on your definition of contact. Does someone becoming a member of their tribe count as contact or assimilation?

Neither they call it "spreading the patriarchy"

[Polruan]

So choosing to be attracted to women, that's like "prison gay" is it?

[The Yremia Corporate]

Doesn't everyone say that it isn't a choice?

At one point 'everyone' said the world was flat.

Nope, someone said it was round.

[Teniria]

Can't say that I believe this is a post that belongs on Nationstates, but sure. Have fun.

[Femnipotent]

Empirical evidence is not required for the position you are expousing. You state you have chosen lesbianism. Stating "you cannot choose to be lesbian" is irrelevant, because you clearly have.

If there is a biological component to sexuality it is unlikely that you can consciously choose to change that aspect, but by choosing to resocialise yourself as a lesbian you become indistinguishable from a biologically determined lesbian by the metrics of most empirical measurements. Attempting to "prove" you're wrong by claiming lesbianism is empirically a non-choice is logicially nonsensical when confronted by the fact that you have chosen lesbian.

Your choice invalidates all contrary arguments ipso facto.

Thank you. This is what I was attempting to articulate, but you have done so much more clearly.

[The Mindset Reborn]

It is quite profoundly racist to claim these societies do not engage in socialisation. "Civilisation" has absolutely nothing to do with socialisation.

It's not racist and don't fucking call names like a commissar please? How can it be racist when primitive tribes come in all races? I didn't even claim they did not socialise their children I said that even tribes which are what we would call neglectful and abandoning to their children socialise them to some degree.

It is racist to imply "primitive" societies do not engage in socialisation. All societies engage in socialisation. It's in the name.

[The Yremia Corporate]

So choosing to be attracted to women, that's like "prison gay" is it?

lol dude. just lol.

[JustinusCaesar]

Depends on your definition of contact. Does someone becoming a member of their tribe count as contact or assimilation?

Neither they call it "spreading the patriarchy"

Are you just bashing the OP or is this from some movie I have never seen?

[The Yremia Corporate]

Neither they call it "spreading the patriarchy"

Are you just bashing the OP or is this from some movie I have never seen?

A mockumentary (can't remember the name but it was funny) and OP bashing.

[Mourro]

I think you're missing the point here..your thread is about 'choosing lesbianism', which I insist is not a choice, in my humble opinion. I'm not talking about shaven women or pornography...what does that have to do with 'choosing' a sexuality? My point was supposed to be that it IS NOT a conscious choice to dictate what you are naturally attracted to. Natural as in what is right for you, what is initial and instinctive to you. So yes, of course, we have over a million tastes. Because we do not and cannot conform 100% to an 'appropriate' sexuality. We can try, but it's not true to your personal nature. And again you're talking about domination of sexuality (your Greece argument). Maybe you should change your thread title to 'Forced Into Lesbianism' or something. And no, of course all Greek men would not have been naturally bisexual just because of that time period. As I said before, people of ALL sexualities existed, exist and will most likely continue to exist in ALL societies, cultures and so on. It's only the 'exposure', or the 'approval', or the 'liberalism' etc which varies across time and place. This is because, I believe, sexuality is nature! And also, many controlled social circles and clans like that of Ancient Greece were not constant to one sexuality, such as East Asian Buddhist communities where women were banned from monasteries, but that didn't stop some monks having sex with them. Also, many monks had sex and relationships with other men. So, nothing can ever truly control sexuality, so I would advise you not to do that to yourself either. If you're not attracted to men, that's fine. You can be a 'lesbian'. But if you are, then you can't 'choose' lesbianism. Sexuality doesn't just disappear.

I do fail to see the point of your argument. I am not being forced into anything. I am choosing lesbianism. Now some people will claim I was always a lesbian despite my own knowledge about my lack of attraction to women. Others will claim that even if I am attracted to women it means I am still heterosexual. It is as though people think these attractions we have are immutable and formed whole out of some sort of primordial 'cloth' and that cloth can never be tailored or traded in.

I do not understand why it is so important to remove the element of choice from the equation, as though it absolutely must be an inevitability or else it is wrong. The only reason I can think of for this very strange approach to the issue of sexual choice and the issue of choosing a sexual orientation, is that it quickly draws parallels in the minds of well-meaning LGBT allies of arguments used to condemn homosexuality. But to throw out the idea completely because of that is not critical minded.

OK, so, being 'critical-minded', I will suppose that me, as a gay man, am to choose to like women. Because you seem to suggest that choice should be fine and that I can apparently just forget about my natural attraction to men. Suppose I try to have sexual relations with a woman. What do you think will happen? That is something that I have explored in my younger days, and something which fails miserably every time. I am just not naturally attracted to women - or I should say SEXUALLY. Therefore I believe that I cannot simply 'choose' to like women. It would repulse me and make me miserable. I love numerous women, but have never been sexually attracted to any one of them. It's just not in my nature. That is homosexuality, that is my nature. Really, honestly being able to choose and not mind smells like bisexuality to me. Or utter confusion.

[Hydesland]

Empirical evidence is not required for the position you are expousing.

It's required however for the premise that sexuality is a result of conditioning and socialisation, rather than an evolved instinct for instance.

[Polruan]

It is racist to imply "primitive" societies do not engage in socialisation. All societies engage in socialisation. It's in the name.

Not that I was implying that, only that the degree and type of socialisation is necessarily much more, well, primitive, but why would it be racist? Why not "fascist" or "communist", seeing as you're apparently engaged in calling things you don't like names that have nothing to do with them?

I just knocked my head on a doorframe, is that racism too?

[Beldonia]

Doesn't everyone say that it isn't a choice?

Yes, but only scientists, philosophers and even gay people themselves! BUT what do they know?

A lot. Especially gay people.

[The Yremia Corporate]

It's not racist and don't fucking call names like a commissar please? How can it be racist when primitive tribes come in all races? I didn't even claim they did not socialise their children I said that even tribes which are what we would call neglectful and abandoning to their children socialise them to some degree.

It is racist to imply "primitive" societies do not engage in socialisation. All societies engage in socialisation. It's in the name.

Your corner is my corner, I simply hate the words racism and sexism, because they are mostly used in stupid situations where neither is appropriate.

[Seibertron]

So choosing to be attracted to women, that's like "prison gay" is it?

Prison rape?
Well inmates don't choose to be gay they get forced to partake in homosexual unless you talking about the rapist who may or may not have been gay.

[The Halseyist Faction]

What a delightfully interesting thread. I have so many fun things to say.

I'd probably sum them up in internet speak as - ? ... ?. ... ?!?!? ... ! ... ?

But the English version is probably more interesting.

I am confused why the original poster feels the need to shun all men from her life. As there are indeed many men in the world becoming women because they believe (rightly or wrongly) they accidentally have the wrong sexual organs, there are just as many 'women' becoming men for the same reason. Since you can't tell someone who secretly believes inside that they are a different gender, and that while the majority of a sex might follow certain sterotypes, some members of that sex might deny them all, it seems a pretty odd thing to do.

Not to mention the fact if I was a man, and I walked into OP and she was all like, 'I choose not to have anything to do with you, because you were born the way you are.' I'd feel she was being more than a little sexist.
Isn't that the same path racists go down? 'My dad was killed by a black dude. Black dudes are evil. I won't have anything to do with Black dudes, where's my KKK membership card?'
It just seems like a step down a very, very bad path...


Anyway, I digress!
Sexuality.

The tldr version -
I'll believe the OP has 'Become' a lesbian, when she falls in love with a woman.
Not when she fucks one, not when she dates one, not when she has a girl crush on one. When she freely and geninuely falls in love with a member of the same sex, (and only she will know when) then she's a lesbian.

And my entire lethal arguement falls around this one simple basis.

You can't choose to fall in love. (True, you can choose to stop yourself from falling, but you can't make yourself start.)
People have tried, people have lied to themselves. But in the end, they live a lie. (Which often goes bad, fast.)

Now the biological and psychological whatnots as to who and how we fall in love are a little beyond my level of amateur psychology really.

I wish OP the best of luck, but I think she has made poor choices she will regret, and I'm always happy to talk.

[JustinusCaesar]

Are you just bashing the OP or is this from some movie I have never seen?

A mockumentary (can't remember the name but it was funny) and OP bashing.

Shame. Should you ever remember the name, please send it to me in a TG. It sounds like an interesting read.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

I felt the same way when I experimented being gay, for largely the same reasons and the same outcomes.
Unlike you, it's actually encouraged me to remain straight, though being straight means I have significantly less chance of getting laid :/

[Polruan]

So choosing to be attracted to women, that's like "prison gay" is it?

Prison rape?
Well inmates don't choose to be gay they get forced to partake in homosexual unless you talking about the rapist who may or may not have been gay.

No not rape I mean just choosing to use men as substitute women. It used to be quite common in British boarding schools too. And, of course, it doesn't necessarily mean you're choosing to be gay, just like the idea of choosing to be lesbian seems stupid!

[The Yremia Corporate]

I do fail to see the point of your argument. I am not being forced into anything. I am choosing lesbianism. Now some people will claim I was always a lesbian despite my own knowledge about my lack of attraction to women. Others will claim that even if I am attracted to women it means I am still heterosexual. It is as though people think these attractions we have are immutable and formed whole out of some sort of primordial 'cloth' and that cloth can never be tailored or traded in.

I do not understand why it is so important to remove the element of choice from the equation, as though it absolutely must be an inevitability or else it is wrong. The only reason I can think of for this very strange approach to the issue of sexual choice and the issue of choosing a sexual orientation, is that it quickly draws parallels in the minds of well-meaning LGBT allies of arguments used to condemn homosexuality. But to throw out the idea completely because of that is not critical minded.

OK, so, being 'critical-minded', I will suppose that me, as a gay man, am to choose to like women. Because you seem to suggest that choice should be fine and that I can apparently just forget about my natural attraction to men. Suppose I try to have sexual relations with a woman. What do you think will happen? That is something that I have explored in my younger days, and something which fails miserably every time. I am just not naturally attracted to women - or I should say SEXUALLY. Therefore I believe that I cannot simply 'choose' to like women. It would repulse me and make me miserable. I love numerous women, but have never been sexually attracted to any one of them. It's just not in my nature. That is homosexuality, that is my nature. Really, honestly being able to choose and not mind smells like bisexuality to me. Or utter confusion.

Well said sar! and I vote for utter confusion by the looks of the thread and the OP's ideology.

[The Mindset Reborn]

It is racist to imply "primitive" societies do not engage in socialisation. All societies engage in socialisation. It's in the name.

Not that I was implying that, only that the degree and type of socialisation is necessarily much more, well, primitive, but why would it be racist? Why not "fascist" or "communist", seeing as you're apparently engaged in calling things you don't like names that have nothing to do with them?

I just knocked my head on a doorframe, is that racism too?

I do not think you know what the words "socialisation" or "racism" mean.

[Celritannia]

Patently false. If I do not associate with men, how can my heart lead me regardless of what I choose? I choose to love women, not men. It's not as though my 'mind' is going to drag me out into the street to find a man.

And so, how many relationships with women have you had?

I have my gf/partner, and we have a deep connection.

[Femnipotent]

OK, so, being 'critical-minded', I will suppose that me, as a gay man, am to choose to like women. Because you seem to suggest that choice should be fine and that I can apparently just forget about my natural attraction to men. Suppose I try to have sexual relations with a woman. What do you think will happen? That is something that I have explored in my younger days, and something which fails miserably every time. I am just not naturally attracted to women - or I should say SEXUALLY. Therefore I believe that I cannot simply 'choose' to like women. It would repulse me and make me miserable. I love numerous women, but have never been sexually attracted to any one of them. It's just not in my nature. That is homosexuality, that is my nature. Really, honestly being able to choose and not mind smells like bisexuality to me. Or utter confusion.

Choice is fine.

Whether or not you have any reason to choose not to be attracted to men is intensely personal, and I cannot speak to that. Your particular sexual interests are yours, and I am not offloading mine on to you.

Other people have expressed similar feelings to me, both her and in my offline life. I am not trying to make my experience a universal one, and thus my choices should not threaten you.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

Prison rape?
Well inmates don't choose to be gay they get forced to partake in homosexual unless you talking about the rapist who may or may not have been gay.

No not rape I mean just choosing to use men as substitute women. It used to be quite common in British boarding schools too. And, of course, it doesn't necessarily mean you're choosing to be gay, just like the idea of choosing to be lesbian seems stupid!

I do believe that it's not a choice, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that 'choosing' one way or another is 'stupid'.
She could have been this way her whole life and only realised now, hence why it feels like a 'choice'.

[Grand Westphalia]

Ma'm (or miss), I would implore you to keep your sexuality to yourself and those with whom you are... intimate... ahem, that said, "tmi".