RE: If homosexuality were preventable should it be prevented?
February 27, 2013 at 10:37 pm
(This post was last modified: February 27, 2013 at 10:49 pm by Question Mark.)
(February 27, 2013 at 10:19 pm)paulpablo Wrote: I'm sure some people would volunteer to change their sexuality because you know, if there's something that can be done that's weird someone somewhere is going to do it, but i think its fairly obvious the general rule is people are gay because they like being gay and straight because they like being straight so barely anyone would volunteer to change.
(February 27, 2013 at 9:50 pm)Question Mark Wrote: Or bisexual? Pansexual? Transexual?
If it were made a choice, why not go broad? Why not be cured one way and then back the other way? It's an interesting prospect when it actually is a choice
Transexual isn't a sexuality, also in the context of this proposed situation where people are volunteering to become homosexuals to prevent population overflow becoming pan sexual or bi sexual wouldn't have much benefit.
It was a joke, honestly. By this point I thought people weren't taking the issue very seriously, so I threw in some implications of rampant promiscuity, which is a stereotype of pansexuals and bisexuals (as I'm only too familiar), and of misguided collectivism (transexuals not being an orientation as you pointed out). Did I not convey the irony very well? It doesn't always translate so well online without the body language and tone.
(February 27, 2013 at 10:19 pm)paulpablo Wrote: Transexual isn't a sexuality, also in the context of this proposed situation where people are volunteering to become homosexuals to prevent population overflow becoming pan sexual or bi sexual wouldn't have much benefit.
I am sorry if I gave some sort of offense or said something insensitive
If you believe it, question it. If you question it, get an answer. If you have an answer, does that answer satisfy reality? Does it satisfy you? Probably not. For no one else will agree with you, not really.
