If being gay isn't a choice. Is having sex with mga hayop not a choice as well?

I know it's not a choice to be gay. But I got asked this tanong sa pamamagitan ng one of my friends. We were talking about the movie "Deliverance" and he asked me "if having sex with an animal really exist in the real world (which it does), can you still honestly say that being gay isn't a choice?" I told him I don't see it as the same at all. It's like the ones that tried to put homosexuals in the same category as molesters, which isn't the same thing and totally ridiculous. I quickly changed the subject because I didn't want to argue about it anymore. It kind of made me mad though.

I just want to see what you think about it.


 Vixie79 posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas
next question »

LGBT  pinakamahusay na sagot

Cinders said:
Zoophilia, also known as bestiality (although the latter has madami negative connotations) is not a sexual orientation, it is a philia.

Somewhere else on this site I explained the difference between a philia and a sexuality, but I forget where it was... I'll keep an eye out for you and link you.

But long story short, humans can have all sorts of philias, from the utterly benign, even sweet (such as agathophilia - pag-ibig of kindness), to the downright disturbing (coprophilia - pag-ibig of feces). While philia's often stimulate a pag-ibig so great it's sexual, they are not considered sexual orientations, like heterosexuality or homosexuality.

(link). From that post:

"A philia is quite narrowly defined, and generally revolves around a specific aspect of an object or individual (the aforementioned 'anthophilia' is an obsessive pag-ibig of flowers). It's not the same as simply liking the hair color of an individual, it's being exclusively attracted to something.

This, I would say, is the beginning and end of everything that philias have in common with sexual orientations. While still having some parameters (straights exclusively like the opposite sex, gays exclusively like the same sex), the variation within the definition is broad. And within that definition, a straight men might prefer brunette women, but he would never be attracted to a brunette man. This is one reason that there are both straight and gay age-philes."

That comment was in discussion of a philia based on age (pedo-, hebe-, and ephebo-), but I feel the comparison still stands, as sexuality is often (unjustly, IMO) compared to pedophilia, which, like zoophilia, is a -philia, not sexuality.

Back to the tanong at hand - are -philias a choice? All in all, I'd say not. I don't believe a pedophile, for instance, or a zoophile chooses to be a pedophile/zoophile anymore than a gay man chooses to be gay. The difference between the two lies in victimization. With zoophiles, consent can never be given, and mga hayop are not sentient, ergo any sexual act with an animal is considered rape. Similarly, a child cannot give consent as they are not considered to have adequate intellectual understanding of the act of sex, and so any sexual act with a minor is also considered rape. With sexualities, the acts occur between two consenting adults, generally in a reciprocal, equal-status, loving relationship. There is no such thing as a reciprocal, equal-status romantic relationship between a minor and an adult, because the adult holds all the power. There is no such thing as a reciprocal, equal-status romantic relationship between a person and an animal, because the animal is not sentient.

Hopefully, this will give you something madami solid with which to retort the susunod time this topic comes up.
select as best answer
posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas 
*
HAHA! I was hopeing you would find this. Thank you so...so much. It will definitely help.
Vixie79 posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas
next question »

Sagot

r-pattz said:
Actions are choices. Genes and/or external factors in your life, in addition to emotions, are not choices.

I wish you'd have stayed and talked it out with your friend. He's really ignorant. -_-
select as best answer
posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas 
*
VBA.
GaGaBoi posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas
*
Sometimes it really doesn't matter what you say.
Vixie79 posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas
*
We've had these arguments before and he just opens them up just to argue and make me flustered. He has no thoughts of changing his nakakita about it. About the WHOLE subject as a whole mind you. *sighs*
Vixie79 posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas
londonsrock said:
I think this is actually a very good tanong because it challenge our thinking of where do we draw the line for what is conventional and what is socially accepted. I think for our generation specially being gay is increasingly madami accepted but still carries a lot of stigma. Sodomy in the other hand is not accepted. Both are not convectional but are seem to some degree as sexual deviation. To me being gay you can't help how you feel but it is kind of beautiful when two people pag-ibig each other regardless of orientation. Sodomy is disgusting and kind of violates animal rights.
select as best answer
posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas 
*
"To me being gay you can't help how you feel but it is kind of beautiful when two people pag-ibig each other regardless of orientation. Sodomy is disgusting and kind of violates animal rights." - Sodomy is the act of anal sex, with a human (male/female or male/male) or otherwise. But generally refers to humans. I feel that your statement is somewhat contradictory.
Cinders posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas
next question »