Homosexuality doesn't exist (READ)

In this thread, I want you to pretend or imagine that homosexuality is an entirely unknown concept to society. It has neither a social stigma or any support. Entirely neutral, since it's unknown. Homosexuality doesn't exist in nature, either.


Now, presume you've started to have feelings for someone of the same sex (let's say you're a guy and you have feelings for another guy).

How do you think you would interpret those feelings?

What do you think would be the reaction of those around you?

Do you think you would be terribly confused, or comfortable?

I think it would be a lot like discovering your homosexuality right now, in a culture in which it is not an acceptable norm (in the US), except 100 times worse; that much more confusing for you to figure out what's going on, that much more uncomfortable, and that much less likely to be well-received by others.

At the risk of being THAt guy who makes the thread go off topic, I want to apoligise...

Anyways, if I had those feelings, I would probably just go play with my sister's dolls, get married and use sex for gratification purposes. I'd have a couple children and they would help me with the farm. Sound familiar? Probably because I imagine this is the way things used to work in the earlier days, before society was so sexually promiscuous and willing to explore.

I would follow whatever my desires were - this scenario is nothing different from how I feel about it today.

If, by having sex with a man/woman it catergorizes me into a certain sexuality, so be it - it's the people who are describing me who will use those words, not I.

Homosexuality was not a no-no in ancient Greece and ancient Rome. If we had stories, dialogue and editorials from that era.....

Until recently many people didn't consider teen boys jacking off together and such as being homosexual but normal behavior for boys "not interested" in girls yet. Homosexuality was viewed as a stage in a boys develolpment that go "stuck" for some reason and the boy's mental and emotional development didn't develop.

I understand that in some past Eastern cultures the rite of passage is for boys to give each other a blow job. Wish I could remember the source for that information. Then the boy was ready for sex with a woman.

Saying all this in trying to answer your question. I think the answer can be found in history somewhere. Some culture. Sometime.

My guess would be that each of us being naturally and fully human would do what comes naturally: we would seek association with other human beings. In the process we might discover that we relate to persons of both sexes but not always in the same way. It is certainly true that very young children relate to each other, with little regard for the sex of the other.

(Consider, for instance, how we have rest rooms labeled for boys and girls in our schools and the separation grows. much of what we have is very early determined by our culture. Now, if we got rid of that we might expect different results.)

If we had the conditions SPAMALOT proposes, we might have the benefit of a whole lot more wholesome male-to-male bonding involving no sex at all than we have today; remember, not every relationship has to be sexual. Inevitably some relationship become more than simple friendship bonding; and, in that case I think we would have freer sexual bonding at a quite early age among males. If you can add in a more permissive opposite sex bonding we would have a definite increase in teen pregnancy. Every society it would seem attempts to bring some order into the process and no society has yet come up with a satisfactory arrangement to meet the sexuality needs of all.

In this senerio, where there was no stigma of being homosexual, would there be awareness of std's?

Why would there not be? STD's are not exclusive to homosexuals.

That is indeed true.

No stigma= No shame. Maybe it would feel like discovering electricity. You would go with the feeling and people would look at you and wonder why you look so happy. You would tell other men at lunch and they would say that they had felt that way once and wish they could feel it again, but the feeling didn't last as long as they would have liked, or someone else took their love away and wanted it all and he couldn't share. You can write your own ending to this story but you have to write an ending here where someone is going to stick their nose is your business and trash you and make what you feel and what you do is wrong. Or you can write an ending where people do what they feel is the right thing and live and let live. See?

Homosexuality is just natural for some. It's part of nature. As is polygamy. It's completely acceptable in nature. There's nothing wrong with it. Consciousness is what decides what's wrong, creates hate and prejudices. Instinctually, we do what feels good.

GAY ANIMALS!

I remember reading in my history books that there was a Whole LOT of M2M sex going on, and it was commonplace for the instructors to have sex with their students.
(That exherpt was from my class that I just took recently, and out of my book as well)
Having a houseboy was like having a maid, with fringe benefits.
Wasn't it part of becoming an "Enlightened Despot"?

The only reason that I ask that is that the primary reason, I don't explore much and am just into mutual masterbation is because of the threat of STD's

Your description of the situation pretty much describes the world before Stonewall. Granted, homosexuality was known about, but most of society chose not to be AWARE of its existence, and the authorities were eoncouraged to stamp it out wherever possible so that polite society could continue to pretend that it doesn;texist. I suspect the AWARENESS of homosexuality is much of the reason that there is a lot less nudity in locker rooms, paranoia about being looked at, etc., these days compared with 30 or 40 years ago. Just my two cents.