Why is Male gayness "worse" than Female Gayness
- Thread starter nima55
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It's because males are more notoriously open sexually, so the dominant opinion is 'lets see naked girls'. Personally I prefer male homosexuals, don't take any offense to this, the main reason is that I don't need another reason to fail when asking a girl out, and it's nice if a guy checks you out every once in a while. (in my opinion at least)nima55 said:
It's sad that the answer isn't more sophisticated than that, but that's how I feel it is.
Mostly baseless, then? I can't Google "homosexuality shunning" and not get results on humans without at least a genera or species name.Agayek said:
I also don't particularly trust anything that calls modern tribes "primitive", and I've never read anything to suggest complete cultural homogeny among pre-historic humans.
Basically this.Nibbles said:
I'll argue that a similar kind of thing happens in perceptions of lesbianism, though. Take the stereotypical femme/butch dynamic. Society doesn't really have a problem with "femme" lesbians, but "butch" lesbians do have a certain kind of stigma attached to them. You'll certainly never see two butch lesbians jello wrestling in a movie.
That's why I used the quotation marks. It's less about them being "primitive" and more isolated from outside influences and/or relatively young, it's just generally easier to convey the concept through the use of the word primitive. Most people immediately associate "primitives" with the tribes of the South/Central American jungles and the like, so it makes the explanation easier.Dags90 said:
And there's almost certainly no homogeny among pre-historic humans, I'm not trying to suggest that. What I'm trying to get at is only that there is likely a root cause of the aversion to male homosexuality in our society. Said cause has a number of contributing factors, the vast majority of which were socially engrained by a number of different parties throughout the course of history, but it is not an unreasonable assumption to extrapolate from what data we do have and apply it to early man.
If my conclusions are proven wrong, great I'll have to get to work formulating new ones. I haven't seen anything that would contradict them though.
Because... it's not? At least I don't think so. Other people think so because they are weirded out by people who are different then they are.
Why way prehistory so heavily? We know the ancient Athenians were mostly fine with homosexuality, though not anal sex, and had a large influence on the Western tradition. The Romans were pretty much permissive of anything the aristocracy did sexually, though consulting with your wife on political matters was considered scandalous. Even if we take it as granted that it once existed, we've past this hurdle in some capacity before. Why should we assume that it's because of prior social behaviors and not simply new ones?Agayek said:
Alot of this stems back to traditional Christian and Jewish beliefs. In old testament a man called Onan is killed by God for "spilling his seed" and this why they often consider masturbation a sin.
Male homosexuality is often considered by groups such as Roman Cathloics to be the spilling of a man's seed just like masturbation or using contraception and is thus wrong(This is because they believe sex only exists for the purpose of reproduction; they feel that it shouldn't be for pleasure).
Woman have no seed to spill as it were and so people weren't to bothered about though they could still be considered sinners but it wasn't considered anywhere near as bad.
Male homosexuality is often considered by groups such as Roman Cathloics to be the spilling of a man's seed just like masturbation or using contraception and is thus wrong(This is because they believe sex only exists for the purpose of reproduction; they feel that it shouldn't be for pleasure).
Woman have no seed to spill as it were and so people weren't to bothered about though they could still be considered sinners but it wasn't considered anywhere near as bad.
I take it that you don't actually know any gay people and are just saying these things because you have preconceived notions of what is and isn't appropriate for men. Well, you're entitled to your opinions and all, but a real man doesn't look down upon others for being different than he is. To do so isn't manly and makes one less worthy of being called such.Alexander Sverchkov said:
So, y'know. YMMV.
because they're attention whores. Though it does strike me lots of people will have quoted you an answer already, but hey.Psychotic-ishSOB said:
I sure its historically based, I vaguely think that queen Victoria didn't believe that lesbians existed so she never oppressed them in anyway and neither did society, thus leaving society to accept lesbians more. I'm sure I heard it on QI (A British quiz show which corrects misconceptions and displays interesting facts and information)nima55 said:
