LGBTQ+ Rights / Similar Discussion

@fssp#12170 I apologize for missing the links in your previous comment. I was writing in a browser which apparently didn’t make your embedded links visible.

I think it is misleading to only link to a single (overly-)simplistic study on the matter. The article you linked does not do the study justice; in fact, it does a poor job of explaining the methodology leading to an (un)intentionally misleading conclusion for the reader. The Director of HERI also noted that the attention the study is getting may be misplaced, as there may be trivial reasons for the shift towards liberalism (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/10/2…ed-further-left)
The study referenced in the article is including the single question asking respondents to self-identify their political orentation as far left, liberal, moderate, conversative or far right. I won’t go into depth on why mixing economic policy and value policy on a questionaire is silly, but liberal does not necessairly mean one is on the left in terms of economic policy. To further expand: what defines “far-left”, liberalism, conservatism, and “far-right” is up to each individual being surveyed. Is a social democrat advocating for a minimum wage and collective bargaining a “far-leftist”? If compared to US politicians, then most definitely, but compared to the average US citizen, not so much (and especially not if compared to Europe), but generally: Americans don’t understand formal political labels, which explains why a big chunk of self-proclaimed libertarians / conservatives are in favour of a single-payer system. It would be much more interesting to examine in detail the political views of the faculty vs. students and afterwards grouping people into each category.
This is also neglecting to mention the fact that religiosity is on a steep decline in the US which would naturally correlate with a decline in conservatism based on religious principles (e.g. abortion). And the fact that there is a well-known correlation between education level and political leanings. The more educated one gets, the more liberal you get.
Therefore my point still stands: There is a natural for universities to be more liberal than the general populus. And I don’t understand how you would amend this issue, if this can even be called an issue.
Climate change is a “liberal” issue in the US, but the scientific consensus (99% of scientists in relevant fields) support the conclusion that the current globla warming is anthropogenic. Not long ago, a big part of the religious right (not economic policy) didn’t think evolution was real. This is not to say that people on the right (non-economic) are inherently stupid. I am merely pointing out that misinfomation, indoctrination, religion and the mainstream media’s quest for “neutrality” instead of objectivity are all elements in the broader spectrum of this conversation.

Quote

Nigeria has the youngest age of consent in the world. "A person who commits an offence of defilement with a child aged eleven years or less shall upon conviction be sentenced to imprisonment for life." (Section 7, Provision 2, Sexual Offences Act Bill 2013.)

I have a hard time understanding how this is meant as a direct response to what I said in my previous comment.

And this is not a response to anything I said in my previous comment. I asked why didn’t you point to Scandinavia or just half of Europe as an example instead of a socially-regressive country like Nigeria? The fact that you point to this country specifically makes me think that you’re being disingenious. I’m not going to argue whether or not the legal age of sexual consent should be 15, 18 or 21 because that wasn’t what I was saying. I made the point that there is a big gap between an adult having sexual relations with a 15-year old vs. an adult having sexual relations with a minor (e.g. 6-year old), and the fact that many countries consider individuals below the age of 18 mature enough to sexually consent was my example. I am not arguing that legality equals morality, I was merely using this an example that the general public (publically elected officials) do indeed see the difference.

Quote

I fail to see the point you are making, considering historical pederastic (and archaic homosexual) relationships took place between prepubescent children and middle-aged men, while also including children who had approached or passed the Greek standard of puberty.

I honestly can't tell if you're being intentionally obtuse, and/or if you’re obfuscating.

I made it quite clear that this is not a topic that I am knowledgeable of, so I don’t think it is productive to continue this part of our discussion. I also mentioned that I don’t think this has anything to do with the topic at hand.
I linked you to a reference in the same Wikipedia article you previously mentioned wherein it was stated that pederasty in ancient Greece was a socially acknowledged romantic relationship between an adult male and a younger male, where the younger male was usually in his teens. I acknowledged that it certainly happened to prepubescent boys, so I don’t even get why you’re continuing the conversation. I cited a source stating that the younger male was usually a teen, and that’s all.

@billy7oblos#12200 @Darth#12237 already stated some of my positions so I will only reply with what hasn’t already been said.

Quote

you cannot claim that the number of LGBT did not increase because they never used to exist before.

You fail to explain why I can’t claim this.

Quote

You are the one making the claim that somehow the number was constant through time so you must prove your claim.

Are you a record player? You made the claim that homosexuality is increasing in today’s society, but apprently I’m the one who has to disprove your claim. The burden of proof falls upon the one making the claim, and I asked why you thought so, yet you have failed, insofar as this thread is concerned, to demonstrate why you believe so.

Quote

The percentage has not only increased, it went from 0 to whatever it is today (because the number of people identifying as lgbt went from 0-whatever it is today)

Again, homosexuality is a millenial-old “practice”. The number of people identifying as LGBT has indeed “increased”, but that’s because different cultures and time periods had different views on what we now call homosexuality.

Quote

we did not used to kill them "en mass" they were just not as many of them to kill, i cant prove this historically because of lack of data but if we look at the KSA; >200 people received the death penalty total , soo no.

I won’t bother arguing with your if you continue to simply regurtitate the same point over and over. You literally said in your previous comment:

Quote

“the most simple explanation would be that the number of LGBT people has increased from very little to 5%+ because we used to kill LGBT people,”

ergo they were killed en mass, because the homosexual population was kept below 5% at “very little” (your words).

Quote

what i was trying to show is how little homoseuxlity was accepted, 74% of societies either hated, ignored or did not even know about homosexuality. (surely this statistic would be much less if 5% of people are born gay)

Am I not being clear? I don’t disagree with you that a big majority of previous generation despised homosexuality. I don’t get your reasoning that the statistic would be much less if 5% of people are born gay. I have on so many occassions in this thread said that homosexuality has been a taboo for generations, and only recently has become some-what culturally accepted. This is why there is a saying called “coming out of the closet”, because people who were gay either tried to hide it or tried to identify as straight to fit in with the broader society at the time. Far-right Christians in the US hate homosexuals, despite the population being 4%, so I don’t understand your reasoning.

Quote

pedophilia is more stigmatized than LGBT so according to your logic they can be a huge % of people

I never claimed otherwise. I don’t think this is the case, which all empirical data suggests, but I can’t be certain as I don’t involve myself in this topic enough to have a truly educated opinion besides what the science says.

Quote

he still wrote 5%

And later made sure to note that 5% was the UPPER estimate. Why do you feel the need to point this out besides being completely disingenuine when the fact of the matter is that the author himself would disagree with your usage of "5%"

Quote

morally wrong and inherently bad are two different things; for example torturing someone is morally wrong but its not inherently bad, it can even be inherently good if you are torturing them for information.

I don’t necesarilly disagree if that’s how you’re making the distinction between something being utilitarian vs. being moral. But your example is ridiculously poor since almost all studies show that torture is a poor way of extracting reliable intel.

Quote

ok what about bestiality? we kill animals for food, surely rape is less better than killing? would you accept bestiality? what about watching real child porn, as long as you don't pay anyone you are not supporting the child being raped, you are only enjoying it. would you really advocate for child porn? what is inherently wrong with it as long as you don't support the rapist? these things are morally wrong, but morals can be twisted. You wont be able to find inherent harm in these things but you can tell they are morally wrong.

I don’t think raping an animal is a good rebuttal to my point. Killing an animal has an inherent purpose of getting nutrition to survive, whereas fucking a pig is merely for pleasure. And I don’t even necessairly think that killing an animal is moral, so you won’t get me to argue that one is somehow better than the other. So no. I don’t accept beastiality because an animal cannot consent therefore I view it as an immoral act. Same can be said for child porn in that a child does not have the mental aptitude to consent to a sexual act.
However there is indeed a distinction to be made between child porn (abused children) and CGI child porn, where no children are harmed in the making. And child porn is not inherently wrong because that all depends on the context. If studies showed that pedophilia could be treated in some manner wherein child porn is involved as a form of therapy, then I wouldn’t see that as unethical IF the individual filmed in the child porn is now above the age of consent and has agreed to their footage being used in a clinical setting to combat child predators.
So yes, you can indeed find inherent harm in these things in that if you watch child porn you’re supporting the uploader / supporting the act of filming children being abused.

Quote

sorry about the wrong link, i thought i posted another one. When i said transgenders cant get a period i was talking about the mental stress and hardships of a period. It is laughable to think that someone can have 30 trillion cells with a y chromosome and still claim to get a period. this article the first thing this article says is "Why isn’t the medical community looking into this phenomenon?" lol

You didn’t post the wrong link because I already responded to your reference, and it is clear you didn’t read the post.

Quote

https://theestablishment.co/yes-trans-wome…9e8c/index.html Is about a woman feeling symptoms of having a period, not that she’s having an actual period. She doesn’t claim that blood is gushing out of her pussy.

yea but you would need to prove that because you are the one making the claim that the gay people we say now were always there

Do you want me to go and quote your own post in this thread where you make the first claim that the gay population is increasing? The burden of proof falls upon the one making the claim. Kindly read this:
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof

Quote

not really, the link i was replying talked about "the link of genetics and LGBT community" and claims there is a gay gene or similar

And I have continually said that I am not talking about a “gay gene”, yet you continue to regurtitate the same talking point over and over.

@billy7oblos#12224

Quote

point 2: it has nothing to do with how you were raised
yea it does, many studies link homosexuality with being molested as a child. if your claim was true why are there no gay people in the KSA (you need to prove that there are claiming they are repressed means nothing)

We never claimed it has “nothing to do with how you were raised”. Also you speak of many studies that link homosexuality with being molested as a child, yet the one you linked before didn’t claim so, and I have already stated this on a multitude of occassions in this thread. If you have these many studies, why would you link to one which doesn’t support your thesis? Also, there are gay people in the KSA, so I don’t understand why you would bring this up.

Quote

point 3: it is depicted in historical imagery
yea some societies were degenerate, they also had raped children and animals and did some horrible stuff, any society can start to have gay people in it

And we never argued that this was a good thing. All of your three points here have been strawman arguments.

Quote

look at KSA today where it is leagal, is natzi Germany your only example?

Why is Nazi Germany not a good example? And if your government would threatnen you with life in prison or capital punishment over your sexuality, don’t you think you wouldn’t openly show said sexuality in order to avoid these repercussion? I think reading the wikipedia on LGBT rights in the KSA might be an eye opener to the living conditions in which open LGBT-people experience.

Quote

sexual deviancy is morally wrong, where do morals come from? the come from religious scripture or from nature (where else)

Are you trolling? Who wrote the religious scripture, and who came up with the idea of (e.g.) determinism?

Quote

killing is harming animals for pleasure. its not necessary in our modern day. Are you a vegan?

Killing farm animals is not (and has not always) been simply for pleasure, but also nutrition which is crucial to survival. And again, I don’t necessarily disagree that it might be a better idea to be vegan in order to avoid killing overall, but so far, meat substitutes haven’t come far enough to replace meat.

Quote

so its ok if i don't let the rapist know that i am watching it

And how would you go about doing so? And if I were to grant you this point, you’d still be taking advantage of the abuse of children. If I rape a hermit in the woods and kill them would that make it okay? Nobody would know since they’re a hermit, but I still raped and killed them.

Quote

lmao (i actually laughed)

You might laugh, but it has been proven that once you’re injected with predominantly female hormones, or if you were previously a woman, you get to experience – symptoms – associated with a period. I am not saying that if you are a male -> female transgender that you will suddenly bleed out of your “fake” vagina without some sort of medical intervention being needed.

Quote

Citation needed.

Scientists do not yet know the exact cause of sexual orientation, but they theorize that it is caused by a complex interplay of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences.

Frankowski BL; American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Adolescence (June 2004). "Sexual orientation and adolescents". Pediatrics. 113 (6): 1827–32. doi:10.1542/peds.113.6.1827. PMID 15173519.

Mary Ann Lamanna; Agnes Riedmann; Susan D Stewart (2014). Marriages, Families, and Relationships: Making Choices in a Diverse Society. Cengage Learning. p. 82. ISBN 1305176898. Retrieved 11 February 2016. The reason some individuals develop a gay sexual identity has not been definitively established – nor do we yet understand the development of heterosexuality. The American Psychological Association (APA) takes the position that a variety of factors impact a person's sexuality. The most recent literature from the APA says that sexual orientation is not a choice that can be changed at will, and that sexual orientation is most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive and biological factors...is shaped at an early age...[and evidence suggests] biological, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality (American Psychological Association 2010).

Gail Wiscarz Stuart (2014). Principles and Practice of Psychiatric Nursing. Elsevier Health Sciences. p. 502. ISBN 032329412X. Retrieved 11 February 2016. No conclusive evidence supports any one specific cause of homosexuality; however, most researchers agree that biological and social factors influence the development of sexual orientation.

And they do not view it as a choice:

Frankowski BL; American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Adolescence (June 2004). "Sexual orientation and adolescents". Pediatrics. 113 (6): 1827–32. doi:10.1542/peds.113.6.1827. PMID 15173519.

Mary Ann Lamanna; Agnes Riedmann; Susan D Stewart (2014). Marriages, Families, and Relationships: Making Choices in a Diverse Society. Cengage Learning. p. 82. ISBN 1305176898. Retrieved 11 February 2016. The reason some individuals develop a gay sexual identity has not been definitively established – nor do we yet understand the development of heterosexuality. The American Psychological Association (APA) takes the position that a variety of factors impact a person's sexuality. The most recent literature from the APA says that sexual orientation is not a choice that can be changed at will, and that sexual orientation is most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive and biological factors...is shaped at an early age...[and evidence suggests] biological, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality (American Psychological Association 2010).

Gloria Kersey-Matusiak (2012). Delivering Culturally Competent Nursing Care. Springer Publishing Company. p. 169. ISBN 0826193811. Retrieved 10 February 2016. Most health and mental health organizations do not view sexual orientation as a 'choice.'

Although no single theory on the cause of sexual orientation has yet gained widespread support, scientists favor biologically-based theories

Frankowski BL; American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Adolescence (June 2004). "Sexual orientation and adolescents". Pediatrics. 113 (6): 1827–32. doi:10.1542/peds.113.6.1827. PMID 15173519.

There is considerably more evidence supporting nonsocial, biological causes of sexual orientation than social ones, especially for males.

Bailey JM, Vasey PL, Diamond LM, Breedlove SM, Vilain E, Epprecht M (2016). "Sexual Orientation, Controversy, and Science". Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 17 (21): 45–101. doi:10.1177/1529100616637616. PMID 27113562.
LeVay, Simon (2017). Gay, Straight, and the Reason Why: The Science of Sexual Orientation. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199752966.

Balthazart, Jacques (2012). The Biology of Homosexuality. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199838820.

@Rex2LostOldAccount#12248 pedophile =/= child molester

@Rex2LostOldAccount#12260 so a mentally ill person who is not responsible for their situation should be shot?