Berzerker
Deity
in some species a small minority actually procreates while most members dont, like bees and ants
Is Asexuality a choice?
- Thread starter Elta
- Start date
in some species a small minority actually procreates while most members dont, like bees and ants
Evolution does not have a goal, so it can not fail either.
Taking care of your sibling's kids is as useful (evolutionarily) as taking care of your grandkids
LucyDuke
staring at the clock
Really? So nobody ever gets an erection before they choose to have sexual desire? When did you make that decision? (Was it the same time you chose to be attracted to women rather than men?)
Right, but it's usually a pretty good indicator of arousal, isn't it? Arousal correlates pretty well with sexual desire, right? (It doesn't have to be every single time. If you'd like to argue that boners and hornyness don't usually coincide, be my guest.) Do you understand that there is a difference between sexual desire and having sex?
There you go. No, hunger is not a choice. You can decide whether to act on the impulse, but you cannot decide whether to have the impulse.
Obviously you disagree with the analogy. I don't care, because you're wrong.
I have never met a single homosexual who would prefer to be considered a disgusting hellbound deviant and denied basic rights than to be called a fag. You don't get to play the "offensive" card on this topic so leave your damn horse at the door.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Why do you phrase you questions as absolutes when you know the answer isnt that black and white?
Since your not a guy I will fill you in. No, guys typically dont instantly get boners simply because they see a nice looking woman they would be interested in having sex with. But sometimes guys can get erections for seemingly no reason what-so-ever. It happens. /shrug.
Having been married for over 25 years, yeah, I know a bit about it.
Which is why is a very poor comparative for arousal.
Obviously you disagree with the analogy. I don't care, because you're wrong.
Yeah, too bad such playground debate tactics dont really wash in the real world.
I absolutely do. I get to play it whenver I find something offensive. Why dont you leave the bigoted language out of the discussion. But if you insist on wanting to be rude.../oh well.
Btw, neither have I ever used terms like 'disgusting hellbound deviant' either...so dont try to insinuate that I have. Stop trying to inject language that the person your are argueing with never uses.
How about we all calm down before people start earning points, m'kay?
holy king
Deity
you're my personal freaking hero.
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
But humans don't have that social structure or adaptation. We don't have reproductive 'queens' or 'kings'. Evolution did not steer us down that path. There are many apes I've seen who are both homo and hetero, but hardly any outside us that are strictly homo.
Its common in insects but not so much in mammals, especially not in our primate ancestral line. The only reason that in some ape communities only the head male breeds with all the females is because if the other males try to court a female, the head male will pwn them.
No, evolution and life actually does have a goal. Watch any evolution or paleontology documentary. The goal is to pass genes on. The goal of evolution is to produce a creature best suited to the environment and best suited to pass on its traits to the next generation. In that sense, strictly homosexual individuals in a species like ours are evolutionary outcasts or failures. This has nothing to with racism, sexism, homphilia, or any of that political correctness crap. Its simply that they strictly homosexual individual of our species are not functioning the way nature intends them to function. This isn't really a bad thing societal-wise, enough babies are born every day.
Yes, but like I've mentioned before. In our species at least from an evolutionary perspective, having your own kids and taking care of them trumps taking care of your sibling's kids. Why do you think the males of other some primates closely related to us fight for dominance. Its because the dominant male gets first dibs on the female.
Its not actually all that different from humans. In general, the hottest girls and the most well-off guys attract the opposite sex more.
LucyDuke
staring at the clock
I never said anything about instant boners. Your position, best I can tell, is that having sexual desire is a choice and that one will not be interested in sex unless one has explicitly chosen to be. Since an erection is (usually) indicative of sexual desire, it follows that a man would have to make that choice to have sexual desire before he gets any meaningful erections. You're the one that said there's a decision before an erection. I think that's silly and ridiculous.
The reason I chose that particular physiological occurance is because it correlates so well with sexual arousal. My initial point was made referencing personal experience, and we ladies don't have quite so obvious a physical response. We can scrap the erections if you want, they're pretty extraneous. The actual idea is sexual desire and arousal, we can just talk about that directly, since you understand that desire is not an action any more than a woody is a bed romp.
So I accept your apology for insinuating that my having sexual desire is somehow some bad thing I would want to shirk responsbility for. I will take responsibility for my actions.
Sexual desire is not a choice. You can decide whether to act on the impulse, but you cannot decide whether to have the impulse. Sexual desire is an instinct beaten into life from the very dawn of sexual reproduction. There is no conscious on-off switch.What you're saying is so blatantly wrong that there isn't even a "debate" to be had.
I wrote an extensive response but I don't want to upset Turner, so all you get is this:
Sorry, bro. No gay-foe gets any such linguistic sympathy from me. Euphemisms corrode ethics.
Not always true, because of teamwork. Potentially: if I have kids, and my brother has kids, we're competing with each other to the point where both of our lineages suffer. Our family gets outcompeted. If there aren't enough calories for both our lineages (or enough outside mates), they have trouble. However, if my brother takes care of my kid, my son will outcompete males from other lineages due to sufficient calories and training.
Ostensibly, we could kill the children of our tribe (other than our own) when times get rough. This is what gorillas do. But some primate lineages have more teamwork in their culture.
From the point of view of the DNA of the grandparents, remember, what's important is healthy grandchildren: it doesn't matter if it's gained through teamwork amongst the parents or through competition. Remember, it's the DNA of the grandparents that are 'deciding' whether their children will contain homosexual genes (if such things exist)
As an aside, grandparents taking care of grandchildren selects for healthy and delayed aging.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Think what you want, but reallize there are a whole lot of men that go out for the evening stating "I'm going to get laid tonight" with no more plans than that to start with. Thats making a decision before the girl, before the erection, before the whole shebang. And while sex can most certainly be spontaneous, there are typically decisions made prior to that to set the stage even for that.
Havent you ever heard the term 'sex starts in the head'? Its very true.
No...no it doesnt.
Wait till you hit 40.
How can you accept things that arent offered? And where did I ever say sexual desire was somehow a bad thing? I never did.
Rofl. I love how you make things up out of whole cloth to make yourself happy there Lucy. Whatever gets you to sleep at night I suppose.
Then there should be no such thing as asexuality. Nor would people say things like "I need to get in the mood'....perhaps if your ever with someone for 25 years or so, you will get what I am saying. I will simply jot this down as one more we dont agree on (surprise!) and move on.
Actually, no...its not.
Hate the sin, not the sinner. Look elsewhere for yo 'gay-foe's'....i.e. like people who actually use that kind of language. Its a good starting point.
philippe
FYI, I chase trains.
I have sex with a's all the time. man i'm screwing over an "A" at this very moment!
LucyDuke
staring at the clock
You understand we're not even arguing about the topic anymore, right?
So how many of those men turned 13 and decided "damn, I'd like to be sexually frustrated for my teen years, I'll start getting horny now even though I probably won't get laid for years"? I'm not saying specific occasions can't be related to decisions, I'm saying that the capacity for sexual desire is not a choice.
Boners and sexual arousal don't correlate?
I don't know if your experience is freaky, but I'm pretty sure most of the time they correlate. Without a penis of my own, I can't be 100% sure, but you're the first male that ever told me or otherwise indicated that boners and sexual arousal don't correlate. I'll leave that to the audience to judge.
(Sleep boners don't count.)
Am I going to grow a penis when I hit 40? Oh goodie. I've always wanted to pee my name in the snow.
Then please explain your interpretation in your first post. What responsibility is there to dodge? Why did you imply that I personally was trying to dodge responsibility for something?
Yes, that's a good point. But asexual folks probably make excellent uncles.
There's a difference between having the capacity for sexual arousal and actually being sexually aroused. An asexual can't "get in the mood".
Then by all means let's keep flinging poo.
You call it a sin worthy of hatred, thanks for the illustration.
So how many of those men turned 13 and decided "damn, I'd like to be sexually frustrated for my teen years, I'll start getting horny now even though I probably won't get laid for years"? I'm not saying specific occasions can't be related to decisions, I'm saying that the capacity for sexual desire is not a choice.
Boners and sexual arousal don't correlate?
I don't know if your experience is freaky, but I'm pretty sure most of the time they correlate. Without a penis of my own, I can't be 100% sure, but you're the first male that ever told me or otherwise indicated that boners and sexual arousal don't correlate. I'll leave that to the audience to judge.(Sleep boners don't count.)
Am I going to grow a penis when I hit 40? Oh goodie. I've always wanted to pee my name in the snow.
How can you accept things that arent offered? And where did I ever say sexual desire was somehow a bad thing? I never did.
Rofl. I love how you make things up out of whole cloth to make yourself happy there Lucy. Whatever gets you to sleep at night I suppose.
Then please explain your interpretation in your first post. What responsibility is there to dodge? Why did you imply that I personally was trying to dodge responsibility for something?
Yes, that's a good point. But asexual folks probably make excellent uncles.
There's a difference between having the capacity for sexual arousal and actually being sexually aroused. An asexual can't "get in the mood".
Then by all means let's keep flinging poo.
You call it a sin worthy of hatred, thanks for the illustration.
In puberty, men don't mostly have a choice on when they get an erection.
Although I can't recall a time getting one after puberty.
Although I can't recall a time getting one after puberty.
Kozmos
Jew Detective
Not to dispute your overall argument Lucy there's such a thing as a random boner...seriously I can (and have -_-') get one while on a bus full of old people. Doesnt mean I'm aroused by them.
Japanrocks12
tired of being a man
so if I get an erection sitting in a classroom right after a hot girl walks across from me, I've made a decision to get a boner in an absolutely normal setting... before I get the boner?
LucyDuke
staring at the clock
Oh, of course. An informal survey of a few guys at hand said 70%, 80%, 90%, and 95% of the time, an erection was related to sexual arousal. (While awake.) I don't pretend that 30%, 20%, 10%, and 5% don't exist, they're just trumped. But honestly, they're not terribly relevant, they're just an indicator. There's no argument that they don't correlate.
Eran basically answered it on the first page, and all this squabbling is mostly pointless. I don't think whether you are sexually attracted to people or not (asexuality) is a choice, but engaging in sexual activity (celibacy or non-celibacy) is.
So you can be asexual, but non-celibate, or celibate and sexual (heterosexual or homosexual or whatever). While I'm willing to bet that a majority of people that are asexual are also usually celibate, they are entirely different ideas.
And while I think I mostly agree with you, I think you underestimate the ability of human being's to shape who, and how, they're sexually attracted to someone. It's not like a light switch that can be turned on and off, but I do think you can restrict, or at least restrain, your sexual attraction to someone, and not just your sexual interaction with them. Have you really never forced yourself to not be attracted to someone that you didn't think you should?
And yes, I realize this is kind of tangential to the actual thread topic. I just find it interesting.
So you can be asexual, but non-celibate, or celibate and sexual (heterosexual or homosexual or whatever). While I'm willing to bet that a majority of people that are asexual are also usually celibate, they are entirely different ideas.
As others have said, not necessarily.
And while I think I mostly agree with you, I think you underestimate the ability of human being's to shape who, and how, they're sexually attracted to someone. It's not like a light switch that can be turned on and off, but I do think you can restrict, or at least restrain, your sexual attraction to someone, and not just your sexual interaction with them. Have you really never forced yourself to not be attracted to someone that you didn't think you should? And yes, I realize this is kind of tangential to the actual thread topic. I just find it interesting.
Narz
keeping it real
Usually, except sometimes in the morning I wake up with one. I guess it's kind of like my penis's version of a good morning stretch. If there happens to be a woman next to me I may decide to use it in a sexual way but usually I just get up & go about my business & it goes away.Boners and sexual arousal don't correlate?
There are ways to control them most of the time, thinking of certain very unsexy things for instance. I get what both you & MobBoss are saying, he's saying generally people generally go out with the express purpose of getting (and using) an erection (or a wet vagina to get off dicks for a moment) whereas if they stayed home and played WorldofWarcraft instead an erection would be an unlikely result. But talking about the angle of one's dangle or the humidity of one's kitty is besides the point. The desire behind the compulsion to sexually connect is generally beyond a person's conscious control. Lucy is correct in this & while there may be some people who can wake up in the morning & choose to be attracted to one sex or the other the vast majority of us cannot, no more than we can make hot tea taste like orange juice.
I've had a few since then.
Similar threads
