@LuckyCharms Said 
Peer pressure? Could be several reasons. It doesn't really do anything to disprove what I said. They could be acting in accordance or not in accordance with their own sexual orientation for a myriad of reasons.
But if you want to come on here and tell me I'm wrong and then say you are right you're going to have to come up with something more than one historical example. In fact I would say without some kind of scientific evidence, all we are doing is debating opinions. I expressed mine. You expressed yours. The difference is I didn't call you patronizing because I disagreed with you.
I didn't call you patronising because I disagreed with you. I said I found it patronising that you would presume to tell people who think they have changed their sexuality that actually, deep down inside, they have not. By adding this ad-hoc modification to your account, it goes from easily falsifiable to unfalsifiable. A person who has altered their sexuality is indistinguishable from someone who has failed to do so, so what does this difference amount to? But I would have thought each person was, themselves, the authority on their own sexual character.
I didn't tell you immediately that you were wrong, I just asked you to substantiate what seemed like a strong claim. And if an historical example is not enough to count as a legitimate challenge to your view that sexuality is biologically innate, then what is? I don't see any other way of challenging that than providing an example of a culture which diverges from our own in terms of its sexual norms.
You say that the ancient Greeks may not have been acting in accordance with "their own sexual orientation". If someone's sexual orientation is different to what they think it is, how can they be mistaken? Isn't how someone thinks and feels about themselves what really matters in terms of their personal identity? Or can someone else tell them they are wrong? And if they did, how would they prove it?
Feb 01, 2011 @ 00:00:44
you're a classic.
