TeenHelp
Support Forums Today's Posts

Get Advice Connect with TeenHelp Resources
HelpLINK Facebook     Twitter     Tumblr     Instagram    Hotlines    Safety Zone    Alternatives

You are not registered or have not logged in

Hello guest! (Not a guest? Log in above!)

As a guest on TeenHelp you are only able to use some of our site's features. By registering an account you will be able to enjoy unlimited access to our site, and will be able to:

  • Connect with thousands of teenagers worldwide by actively taking part in our Support Forums and Chat Room.
  • Find others with similar interests in our Social Groups.
  • Express yourself through our Blogs, Picture Albums and User Profiles.
  • And much much more!

Signing up is free, anonymous and will only take a few moments, so click here to register now!


Current Events and Debates For discussions and friendly debates about politics and current events, check out this forum.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
  (#1 (permalink)) Old
InTheFlood Offline
Walking In The Sun...
I've been here a while
********
 
InTheFlood's Avatar
 
Name: Amelia
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Location: Waiting On A Second-Hand Pick Me Up

Posts: 1,336
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: January 7th 2009

"Exceptions" - January 15th 2010, 05:19 PM

So yesterday in my LGBT club we got on to discussing one of the members who wasn't there that week and her girlfriend who apparently isn't a lesbian or bi, and that the girl in my group is just her exception..
So we ended up having a debate on whether it was possible to have exceptions.

Personally I think everyone is a little bit bi, its just whether or not you choose to embrace it.
What do you guys think?


║▌│█│║▌║││█║▌│║▌║
ORIGINAL MCFLY FAN Ū


"Another year over, and we're still together.
It's not always easy, but McFly's here forever
I know you believe me, when you look into my eyes
'Cause McFly never dies, because The Heart Never Lies!"
   
  (#2 (permalink)) Old
I-cant-see Offline
Member
Welcome me, I'm new!
*
 
I-cant-see's Avatar
 
Name: Charlie
Age: 26
Gender: Female

Posts: 23
Join Date: December 22nd 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 15th 2010, 05:25 PM

I think people sure can have exceptions

All my gay friends have exceptions. And some of my straight friends do too.


"Small minds discuss persons. Average minds discuss events. Great minds discuss ideas. Really great minds discuss MATHEMATICS."

Tell yourself time and time again that it's okay, it is.
   
  (#3 (permalink)) Old
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
her_beautiful_mistake's Avatar
 
Name: Rachel
Gender: Female
Location: Britland

Posts: 2,262
Blog Entries: 29
Join Date: January 18th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 15th 2010, 05:48 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by I-cant-see View Post
All my gay friends have exceptions. And some of my straight friends do too.
ditto.

1010101010
   
  (#4 (permalink)) Old
St.Vincent Offline
Edna
I've been here a while
********
 
St.Vincent's Avatar
 
Name: Edna
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Location: Somewhere Across Forever

Posts: 1,269
Blog Entries: 102
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 15th 2010, 06:14 PM

I think sexuality and labeling it is so complicated that this discussion is just a discussion of.. like semantics. Does being "gay" mean "being exclusively interested in men, no exceptions" or does it account for exceptions? It's up to how you define being gay, and ultimately, it just boils down to your opinion of it.

I think, to be respectful of the person with an "exception" I would accept them and their definition of their sexuality. To me, it's no big deal.


I am waylaid by Beauty. Who will walk
Between me and the crying of the frogs?

(My PM box is always open.. if I can't help you, I'll find someone who can)
   
  (#5 (permalink)) Old
InTheFlood Offline
Walking In The Sun...
I've been here a while
********
 
InTheFlood's Avatar
 
Name: Amelia
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Location: Waiting On A Second-Hand Pick Me Up

Posts: 1,336
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 15th 2010, 06:23 PM

It wasn't in a nasty way, It was actually started by our youth workers..


║▌│█│║▌║││█║▌│║▌║
ORIGINAL MCFLY FAN Ū


"Another year over, and we're still together.
It's not always easy, but McFly's here forever
I know you believe me, when you look into my eyes
'Cause McFly never dies, because The Heart Never Lies!"
   
  (#6 (permalink)) Old
TigerTank77 Offline
Rage is the best anesthetic
I've been here a while
********
 
TigerTank77's Avatar
 
Name: Ben
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Location: NY

Posts: 1,534
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 15th 2010, 06:57 PM

IS this like that '"I'd go straight/gay for *insert name here*" thing? Or am I lost.


Often I lie wide awake, thinking of things I could make.
But I don’t seem to have the parts to build them.
I am so scared of what will kill me in the end, for I am not prepared.
I hope I will get the chance to be someone, to be human.





  Send a message via AIM to TigerTank77 Send a message via MSN to TigerTank77 Send a message via Skype™ to TigerTank77 
  (#7 (permalink)) Old
losing touch. Offline
oh, really?..
Jeez, get a life!
***********
 
losing touch.'s Avatar
 
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Location: UK

Posts: 5,996
Blog Entries: 537
Join Date: January 8th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 15th 2010, 07:10 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerTank77 View Post
IS this like that '"I'd go straight/gay for *insert name here*" thing? Or am I lost.
yeah i think you're on the right track..

personally, yeah i think you can have exceptions. i'm straight.. but cheryl cole.. hmmmm..


..and our dreams will break the boundaries of our fears..



   
  (#8 (permalink)) Old
Union Of V Offline
Scepticism With A Tail
I can't get enough
*********
 
Union Of V's Avatar
 
Name: Basil!!!
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Cork, Ireland

Posts: 2,017
Blog Entries: 22
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 15th 2010, 07:12 PM

Well, your sexuality is which way you lean, but you can lean forward and get pushed back Don't think "exception" is quite the word, rather..... "deviation"??
  Send a message via MSN to Union Of V  
  (#9 (permalink)) Old
Double X Offline
bee boop
I've been here a while
********
 
Double X's Avatar
 
Name: Kyle
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Boston

Posts: 1,621
Blog Entries: 5
Join Date: March 11th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 15th 2010, 07:21 PM

Agreed, I am straight but...BJ Novak, young Morrissey, and 90s Damon Albarn...


"We will ask nothing. We will demand nothing. We will take." -- May 1968, French Graffiti
   
  (#10 (permalink)) Old
TigerTank77 Offline
Rage is the best anesthetic
I've been here a while
********
 
TigerTank77's Avatar
 
Name: Ben
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Location: NY

Posts: 1,534
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 15th 2010, 08:15 PM

Vin Diesel... mmmmmm


Often I lie wide awake, thinking of things I could make.
But I don’t seem to have the parts to build them.
I am so scared of what will kill me in the end, for I am not prepared.
I hope I will get the chance to be someone, to be human.





  Send a message via AIM to TigerTank77 Send a message via MSN to TigerTank77 Send a message via Skype™ to TigerTank77 
  (#11 (permalink)) Old
Brandon Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
Brandon's Avatar
 
Name: Brandon
Age: 29
Gender: Male

Posts: 2,540
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 15th 2010, 08:42 PM

Personally, I think there is no such thing as exceptions when dealing with sexuality. You're either straight, bi-sexual, or homosexual. "Exceptions" is just another word for "bi-sexual" in my book.
   
  (#12 (permalink)) Old
Casey. Offline
Dance with me
I can't get enough
*********
 
Casey.'s Avatar
 
Name: Casey
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Location: Somewhere in my mind

Posts: 2,343
Blog Entries: 337
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 15th 2010, 10:58 PM

I agree that there are 'exceptions'. Everyone has their own preferences, like I'm into girls, but there's this one guy who appeals to me. That's just my preferences.


She whispered to her own reflection "I will be strong."

"I am not what has happened to me.I am what I have chosen to become."- Carl Jung

"If ye harm none, do as ye wish."

Sometimes things just happen.


Smile through the tears.


PM me

  Send a message via Yahoo to Casey.  
  (#13 (permalink)) Old
Exelus Offline
Aspiring Psychologist
Junior TeenHelper
****
 
Exelus's Avatar
 
Name: Russell
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Location: South Georgia A.K.A Redneck Central

Posts: 211
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: February 13th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 15th 2010, 11:12 PM

Personally I don't understand the need for such categories. I thought that since Kinsey, we could all agree that sexuality is flexible to a very large degree. You can be straight with bisexual leanings, and homosexual with bisexual leanings. I don't think there is such a thing as "Exceptions", it just means you need to re-think where you are on the scale.


If at first you don't succeed, try try again. If you still don't succeed, redefine success.

Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. ~Dr. Seuss


  Send a message via MSN to Exelus  
  (#14 (permalink)) Old
Brandon Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
Brandon's Avatar
 
Name: Brandon
Age: 29
Gender: Male

Posts: 2,540
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 15th 2010, 11:47 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exelus View Post
Personally I don't understand the need for such categories. I thought that since Kinsey, we could all agree that sexuality is flexible to a very large degree. You can be straight with bisexual leanings, and homosexual with bisexual leanings. I don't think there is such a thing as "Exceptions", it just means you need to re-think where you are on the scale.
Well, dictionary.com says that "straight" is "heterosexual". I just don't see how you can be straight and have "bisexual leanings" because being straight has nothing to do with liking members of the same sex. If you like members of the same sex in an attraction sort of way, then that automatically eliminates heterosexuality, and therefore eliminates being straight. So that already knocks that out. I think that sexuality should be taken by literal definition. That's how society does it anyways. I could understand stuff like "virginity" where it means different things to different people, but sexuality is just three simplecategories...straight, bi-sexual, and gay. There are no exceptions.
   
  (#15 (permalink)) Old
Exelus Offline
Aspiring Psychologist
Junior TeenHelper
****
 
Exelus's Avatar
 
Name: Russell
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Location: South Georgia A.K.A Redneck Central

Posts: 211
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: February 13th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 16th 2010, 12:05 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
Well, dictionary.com says that "straight" is "heterosexual". I just don't see how you can be straight and have "bisexual leanings" because being straight has nothing to do with liking members of the same sex. If you like members of the same sex in an attraction sort of way, then that automatically eliminates heterosexuality, and therefore eliminates being straight. So that already knocks that out. I think that sexuality should be taken by literal definition. That's how society does it anyways. I could understand stuff like "virginity" where it means different things to different people, but sexuality is just three simplecategories...straight, bi-sexual, and gay. There are no exceptions.
I respectfully disagree, and so does Alfred Kinsey, and most experts on the subject since him. He's the father of Sexology, which is the scientific study of human sexuality.

There is scientific evidence that suggests that sexuality is flexible to a large degree, and isn't broken down into 3 categories at all. The Kinsey Scale ranged from 0-6 with a special category for asexuality, and is now deemed by most sexologists to be too simplistic. I suppose you could say 0 is straight, 6 is homosexual, anything in between is bisexual, but that's too simplistic for such a complex thing.


If at first you don't succeed, try try again. If you still don't succeed, redefine success.

Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. ~Dr. Seuss


  Send a message via MSN to Exelus  
  (#16 (permalink)) Old
Brandon Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
Brandon's Avatar
 
Name: Brandon
Age: 29
Gender: Male

Posts: 2,540
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 16th 2010, 12:48 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exelus View Post
I respectfully disagree, and so does Alfred Kinsey, and most experts on the subject since him. He's the father of Sexology, which is the scientific study of human sexuality.

There is scientific evidence that suggests that sexuality is flexible to a large degree, and isn't broken down into 3 categories at all. The Kinsey Scale ranged from 0-6 with a special category for asexuality, and is now deemed by most sexologists to be too simplistic. I suppose you could say 0 is straight, 6 is homosexual, anything in between is bisexual, but that's too simplistic for such a complex thing.
Thanks for respectfully disagreeing.

Well, I can't really argue against the father of Sexology, but regardless of how flexible sexuality is, if you like a member of the same sex...that's not being heterosexual because it totally defies the definition of being heterosexual. It's like me walking up to a group of black people and saying "Hey, I'm black" when I'm clearly Caucasian. They'd be like...what? Are you on crack? I would understand something like semi-heterosexual or "I'm a level 25 heterosexual" or something else that'd make more sense, but I just don't see how someone could say that they're heterosexual and yet at the same time can also have feelings towards members of the same sex. It's like saying 2 + 2 = 5.
   
  (#17 (permalink)) Old
Marvin Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Name: Marvin
Gender: Male
Location: USA

Posts: 1,576
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 16th 2010, 10:18 AM

There are lots of sexuality labels, and some people even refuse to define with one as it is, this kinda shows that it really isnt just gay, straight and bi.... but these labels often are used in a much broader way anyway, even by society. For example, if some girl had a gf who she geniunely was attracted to in her teens, but then only dated men afterward, society would probably consider her straight (regardless of what she considered herself). Which really therefore would have no founding in her lifetime experiences of sexual attraction.

On top of that, people label their own sexuality, and it is very different from race in that way. Your sexuality is internal, its a feeling. At the end of the day, you know what you are and other people can only guess or question. But if someone is otherwise entirely straight, but they've come across this 1 person who they've been blown away by, from the same sex, but this is the only person who does that, its hardly being bisexual or homosexual in their general attractions, because they arent attracted to the same sex, in general. So why change your label if it doesnt accurately represent how you feel?
   
  (#18 (permalink)) Old
Brandon Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
Brandon's Avatar
 
Name: Brandon
Age: 29
Gender: Male

Posts: 2,540
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 16th 2010, 04:31 PM

Quote:
But if someone is otherwise entirely straight, but they've come across this 1 person who they've been blown away by, from the same sex, but this is the only person who does that, its hardly being bisexual or homosexual in their general attractions, because they arent attracted to the same sex, in general. So why change your label if it doesnt accurately represent how you feel?
One person seems insignificant, but if they're "blown away" by someone of the same sex, I just don't see how that makes them "entirely straight". If I met a guy who I got blown away by, then I'd be fantasizing about another man. I'd be head over heels with another man. That's not being straight/heterosexual at all. Like I said, it's semi-heterosexual...or level 27 heterosexual, but it's not straight. At least, it doesn't literally mean straight, but I don't think that being heterosexual, a word that has a pure and simple definition to understand, should be changed to something that completely contradicts itself.

Let's say you know this guy. He's really nice, has dated a lot of women, and you find out that he's part of the Sex Offender registry who sexually molested a little child. Well, in general...he's a nice guy who's had a lot of girlfriends, reasonably attractive, but that still doesn't change the fact that he's a registered sex offender. Same deal with sexuality...I don't think it really matters whether it's general or not. If a guy likes another guy, then that is not a heterosexual relationship, regardless of the circumstances. Someone can't ask you if you're a gay couple and you can be like "Oh no, we're not gay. I'm straight, he just blew me away...we're in a heterosexual relationship..." and the more you try explaining the relationship, the more it doesn't make sense.

I know a few bisexual women who have a preference to women. Being straight and "generally" liking women but has the ability of becoming attracted to a member of the same sex is just another way of saying "I'm bi-sexual...but I just prefer women".

I just don't see how it would work any other way?
   
  (#19 (permalink)) Old
Stupidity Kills
Outside, huh?
**********
 
OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!'s Avatar
 

Posts: 4,500
Blog Entries: 10
Join Date: December 19th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 16th 2010, 05:57 PM

I think before we go about saying there are or are not exceptions, we first have to know just what it is we're dealing with. For sexual orientation, we have to define what exactly is bisexuality, homosexuality and heterosexuality. The last two are fairly easy but the first one is where it can become rather difficult. The definitions we give are static however people are dynamic and so if someone adheres perfectly to the definition of bisexuality but then deviates just a little bit, they're no longer adhering to the definition so what do we call them? Bisexual? That means we have to re-define our original definition and this continues until our definition becomes vague enough, which also has its own problems then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
Well, dictionary.com says that "straight" is "heterosexual". I just don't see how you can be straight and have "bisexual leanings" because being straight has nothing to do with liking members of the same sex. If you like members of the same sex in an attraction sort of way, then that automatically eliminates heterosexuality, and therefore eliminates being straight. So that already knocks that out. I think that sexuality should be taken by literal definition. That's how society does it anyways. I could understand stuff like "virginity" where it means different things to different people, but sexuality is just three simplecategories...straight, bi-sexual, and gay. There are no exceptions.
Given the diversity of sexual orientation, these at least one of these three categories either have to be very vague. Suppose I want into a crowd that represents the average Western population and there's 10 people (ignore the statistical issues with this). Out of those 10, there are 8 females who I find attractive, 1 male who I find attractive and 1 female who I find unattractive. If I am heterosexual, then this doesn't make sense using your rigid literal definitions. It makes even less sense if I'm homosexual. If I'm bisexual, then it still doesn't make much sense because of the one female who I find unattractive. So what am I? If we create a fourth group, the "deviational group" (the exceptions), then I guess I fit in there. However, many others would fit in there also because not everyone who sees a member of the opposite sex will find that person attractive. That instantly makes them part of the deviational group. The purpose of the 3 labels of sexual orientation was to classify people into one orientation or another yet its purpose has back-fired and caused it to be obselete. So now it has to be decided whether or not the 3 labels will have more flexible definitions or if their rigid definitions are to stay the way they are, then how do the people in the deviational group (the majority) get classified? You can alter the numbers if you want but just try going to a mall or some large public place. See how many males you find attractive and unattractive, and how many females you find attractive and unattractive. You'll find that the result violates your rigid literal definitions you set forth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
One person seems insignificant, but if they're "blown away" by someone of the same sex, I just don't see how that makes them "entirely straight". If I met a guy who I got blown away by, then I'd be fantasizing about another man. I'd be head over heels with another man. That's not being straight/heterosexual at all. Like I said, it's semi-heterosexual...or level 27 heterosexual, but it's not straight. At least, it doesn't literally mean straight, but I don't think that being heterosexual, a word that has a pure and simple definition to understand, should be changed to something that completely contradicts itself.
I'm confused now. If you adhere to the literal definition of heterosexual, then what is "semi-heterosexuality"? Taken literally, I take that to mean I'm half-way attracted to only members of the same sex. How does that work? It may not contradict your definition of heterosexuality, but it certainly makes little sense using the literal view you're taking.
   
  (#20 (permalink)) Old
Brandon Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
Brandon's Avatar
 
Name: Brandon
Age: 29
Gender: Male

Posts: 2,540
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 16th 2010, 07:15 PM

My man, N-izzle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by !!!YOU'RE$NUCKING$FUTZ!!! View Post
I think before we go about saying there are or are not exceptions, we first have to know just what it is we're dealing with. For sexual orientation, we have to define what exactly is bisexuality, homosexuality and heterosexuality. The last two are fairly easy but the first one is where it can become rather difficult. The definitions we give are static however people are dynamic and so if someone adheres perfectly to the definition of bisexuality but then deviates just a little bit, they're no longer adhering to the definition so what do we call them? Bisexual? That means we have to re-define our original definition and this continues until our definition becomes vague enough, which also has its own problems then.



Given the diversity of sexual orientation, these at least one of these three categories either have to be very vague. Suppose I want into a crowd that represents the average Western population and there's 10 people (ignore the statistical issues with this). Out of those 10, there are 8 females who I find attractive, 1 male who I find attractive and 1 female who I find unattractive. If I am heterosexual, then this doesn't make sense using your rigid literal definitions. It makes even less sense if I'm homosexual. If I'm bisexual, then it still doesn't make much sense because of the one female who I find unattractive. So what am I? If we create a fourth group, the "deviational group" (the exceptions), then I guess I fit in there. However, many others would fit in there also because not everyone who sees a member of the opposite sex will find that person attractive. That instantly makes them part of the deviational group. The purpose of the 3 labels of sexual orientation was to classify people into one orientation or another yet its purpose has back-fired and caused it to be obselete. So now it has to be decided whether or not the 3 labels will have more flexible definitions or if their rigid definitions are to stay the way they are, then how do the people in the deviational group (the majority) get classified? You can alter the numbers if you want but just try going to a mall or some large public place. See how many males you find attractive and unattractive, and how many females you find attractive and unattractive. You'll find that the result violates your rigid literal definitions you set forth.



I'm confused now. If you adhere to the literal definition of heterosexual, then what is "semi-heterosexuality"? Taken literally, I take that to mean I'm half-way attracted to only members of the same sex. How does that work? It may not contradict your definition of heterosexuality, but it certainly makes little sense using the literal view you're taking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by !!!YOU'RE$NUCKING$FUTZ!!! View Post
The definitions we give are static however people are dynamic and so if someone adheres perfectly to the definition of bisexuality but then deviates just a little bit, they're no longer adhering to the definition so what do we call them? Bisexual?
What would be an example of when someone "deviates just a little bit"? To me, bi-sexuality is where you like both men and women. I can't think of a way where you can altar the definition of bi-sexuality. If you're a woman and you suddenly decide to start dating women more because men are biologically programmed to procreate, then to me...it's just that you're bi-sexual with a preference to females. I don't see how you could altar bi-sexuality any other way.

Quote:
Out of those 10, there are 8 females who I find attractive, 1 male who I find attractive and 1 female who I find unattractive. If I am heterosexual, then this doesn't make sense using your rigid literal definitions.
Correct. Although, I'm going to have to disagree with the "rigid" part. I don't consider it rigid because heterosexual means

Quote:
Sexually oriented to persons of the opposite sex.
I mean, that's a pretty clear and direct definition. The opposite sex is clearly the opposite gender, so I don't see how it's rigid at all. It doesn't make sense to be attracted to a male and at the same time be heterosexual, when being heterosexual has nothing to do with the same sex and EVERYTHING with the opposite sex.

Quote:
It makes even less sense if I'm homosexual. If I'm bisexual, then it still doesn't make much sense because of the one female who I find unattractive. So what am I?
What do you mean? What I'm getting at is that you're saying that all bi-sexuals find all women attractive, and if you find a woman unattractive, then that's not being bisexual. If you find a male attractive (and by attractive I mean like...interested in him and all that jazz) and a female attractive, then that's bi-sexual. You're both homosexual and heterosexual.

Quote:
If we create a fourth group, the "deviational group" (the exceptions), then I guess I fit in there. However, many others would fit in there also because not everyone who sees a member of the opposite sex will find that person attractive. That instantly makes them part of the deviational group.
I'm not going to speak much about this part because this part totally threw me off and lost me, but what I don't get is how a heterosexual male can have exceptions and still be considered a heterosexual. For instance, when my best friend and I were watching The Transporter, my best friend said that he'd do Jason Stratham in the ass balls deep. For me, I think Jason Stratham is an attractive actor, but I wouldn't do him up his butt. I'm straight and the only exception that I have is if I was paid to have sex with a man for millions of dollars -- which has nothing to do with how attractive I think of the guy, and I'm not doing it out of enjoyment but for strictly the money if presented the opportunity. I just don't understand, I suppose. Maybe it's possible to actually have exceptions, but in my eyes...if you're attracted to a man and you find an even better man, now you're attracted to two men...and to me...that's just saying that you were confused about your sexuality and now you're a bi-sexual because you didn't think you liked men but came across two men.

Quote:
See how many males you find attractive and unattractive, and how many females you find attractive and unattractive. You'll find that the result violates your rigid literal definitions you set forth.
Of course, I see handsome guys walking around the mall, and jail bait walking around too...but I'm not going to make advances on him and try and get in his ass, I'm just gonna think to myself "that guy must get laid a lot" and move on with my life. If he made advances at me, I'd be like "I'm straight, sorry dude". That's like saying "Oh, you have a cute dog. Lemme get some of that, bow chiki wow wow". Just because something is cute/attractive doesn't mean I wanna have sex with it.

Quote:
I'm confused now. If you adhere to the literal definition of heterosexual, then what is "semi-heterosexuality"? Taken literally, I take that to mean I'm half-way attracted to only members of the same sex. How does that work? It may not contradict your definition of heterosexuality, but it certainly makes little sense using the literal view you're taking.
Exactly! That's my point, almost. The reason I put semi-heterosexual because it makes just a little bit more sense to say that you're semi-heterosexual when you're attracted to men also, but altogether...none of it makes sense in the beginning! It all goes back to when I ask...how can you be attracted to a man and still be heterosexual? How can you be half a heterosexual? It's confusing!
   
  (#21 (permalink)) Old
Stupidity Kills
Outside, huh?
**********
 
OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!'s Avatar
 

Posts: 4,500
Blog Entries: 10
Join Date: December 19th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 16th 2010, 08:55 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
What would be an example of when someone "deviates just a little bit"? To me, bi-sexuality is where you like both men and women. I can't think of a way where you can altar the definition of bi-sexuality. If you're a woman and you suddenly decide to start dating women more because men are biologically programmed to procreate, then to me...it's just that you're bi-sexual with a preference to females. I don't see how you could altar bi-sexuality any other way.
Looking over the quote you pointed out, I made an assumption which I see that now it is probably a faulty one, which revolved around your definition of bisexuality. I assumed that for bisexuality, you are sexually attracted to both sexes equally and so when I mean by deviating a bit, I mean that instead of being about 50/50, you're 60/40 or so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
Correct. Although, I'm going to have to disagree with the "rigid" part. I don't consider it rigid because heterosexual means



I mean, that's a pretty clear and direct definition. The opposite sex is clearly the opposite gender, so I don't see how it's rigid at all. It doesn't make sense to be attracted to a male and at the same time be heterosexual, when being heterosexual has nothing to do with the same sex and EVERYTHING with the opposite sex.
You just showed how it is rigid so I'm at a loss of what you're expecting as a response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
What do you mean? What I'm getting at is that you're saying that all bi-sexuals find all women attractive, and if you find a woman unattractive, then that's not being bisexual. If you find a male attractive (and by attractive I mean like...interested in him and all that jazz) and a female attractive, then that's bi-sexual. You're both homosexual and heterosexual.
In your previous quote, you showed how it is a rigid definition. You are correct, I am saying that if a heterosexual doesn't find a person of the opposite sex attractive, then using the definition of "sexually oriented to the opposite sex" (the exact quote), that begs the question what do we label that person as? Your definition doesn't allow for the leniency needed to say that one can still be heterosexual yet find some women unattractive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
I'm not going to speak much about this part because this part totally threw me off and lost me, but what I don't get is how a heterosexual male can have exceptions and still be considered a heterosexual. For instance, when my best friend and I were watching The Transporter, my best friend said that he'd do Jason Stratham in the ass balls deep. For me, I think Jason Stratham is an attractive actor, but I wouldn't do him up his butt. I'm straight and the only exception that I have is if I was paid to have sex with a man for millions of dollars -- which has nothing to do with how attractive I think of the guy, and I'm not doing it out of enjoyment but for strictly the money if presented the opportunity. I just don't understand, I suppose. Maybe it's possible to actually have exceptions, but in my eyes...if you're attracted to a man and you find an even better man, now you're attracted to two men...and to me...that's just saying that you were confused about your sexuality and now you're a bi-sexual because you didn't think you liked men but came across two men.
What that part of my post was getting at was, if there are exceptions to the definitions of sexual orientation, then just saying that there are exceptions creates an informal category. I was then suggesting that there should be a formal category for these exceptions to the definitions. If you don't believe there are exceptions then of course there is no such category.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
Of course, I see handsome guys walking around the mall, and jail bait walking around too...but I'm not going to make advances on him and try and get in his ass, I'm just gonna think to myself "that guy must get laid a lot" and move on with my life. If he made advances at me, I'd be like "I'm straight, sorry dude". That's like saying "Oh, you have a cute dog. Lemme get some of that, bow chiki wow wow". Just because something is cute/attractive doesn't mean I wanna have sex with it.
I wasn't suggesting that you make advances but rather that according to your definition of heterosexuality, a man should be attracted only to women. The point I was making was that your definition doesn't account for the fact that not all men find all women attractive. You and I both know that is the case but your definition doesn't include that and in my argument, I'm using the definition you gave me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
Exactly! That's my point, almost. The reason I put semi-heterosexual because it makes just a little bit more sense to say that you're semi-heterosexual when you're attracted to men also, but altogether...none of it makes sense in the beginning! It all goes back to when I ask...how can you be attracted to a man and still be heterosexual? How can you be half a heterosexual? It's confusing!
So... you use a certain term to make some sense of something temporarily but in the grand scheme of things, it's used to illustrate how nothing makes sense by having that definition make sense? The method you're using is pretty fuzzy to me because when it comes to defining just what semi-heterosexuality is, well, your argument falls apart as previously you mentioned people can be either homosexual, heterosexual and bisexual. In order for semi-heterosexual to fit in, you have to show how it isn't the same as bisexuality and how it isn't violating a premise.

In other words, you're violating an argument you used in a way that doesn't make much sense to show how another argument doesn't make much sense.

When you ask how can you be attracted to a man and still be heterosexual, this is something I'm asking you while adhering to your definition of heterosexuality!
   
  (#22 (permalink)) Old
Brandon Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
Brandon's Avatar
 
Name: Brandon
Age: 29
Gender: Male

Posts: 2,540
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 16th 2010, 09:58 PM

Quote:
Looking over the quote you pointed out, I made an assumption which I see that now it is probably a faulty one, which revolved around your definition of bisexuality. I assumed that for bisexuality, you are sexually attracted to both sexes equally and so when I mean by deviating a bit, I mean that instead of being about 50/50, you're 60/40 or so.
That makes sense. But regardless of whether it's 60/40, 80/20, as long as there's numbers on both sides...I consider that bi-sexual. If you date men and women and you're pretty certain of what your sexuality is, regardless of how many women you date compared to men, as long as you date both of them...that's what I consider bi-sexual.

Quote:
You just showed how it is rigid so I'm at a loss of what you're expecting as a response.
Point taken. Rigid just seems like such a negative term. Yeah, it's exact, precise, straight forward, but it's not the bible, or virginity, it's your sexuality. If you're a heterosexual but you'll say you'll do X in the ass, to me, that's just saying you're either gay or bi-sexual.

Quote:
In your previous quote, you showed how it is a rigid definition. You are correct, I am saying that if a heterosexual doesn't find a person of the opposite sex attractive, then using the definition of "sexually oriented to the opposite sex" (the exact quote), that begs the question what do we label that person as? Your definition doesn't allow for the leniency needed to say that one can still be heterosexual yet find some women unattractive.
My quote for heterosexuality was "Sexually oriented to persons of the opposite sex". It could be one person, it could be several people. It doesn't say "sexually orientated to all persons of the opposite sex", it just says "persons" of the opposite sex. It could be one person...it could be millions of people. If a man doesn't find a woman attractive, that doesn't mean he's not heterosexual...it means he's a human being.

Quote:
So... you use a certain term to make some sense of something temporarily but in the grand scheme of things, it's used to illustrate how nothing makes sense by having that definition make sense? The method you're using is pretty fuzzy to me because when it comes to defining just what semi-heterosexuality is, well, your argument falls apart as previously you mentioned people can be either homosexual, heterosexual and bisexual. In order for semi-heterosexual to fit in, you have to show how it isn't the same as bisexuality and how it isn't violating a premise.
I'm just saying that if Mr. X wants to be a heterosexual with "exceptions", then that's fine...but that's not being a heterosexual according to the literal definition. it's something else. Something like...heterospectical...heterosexual with special benefits. I don't know. But if being a man could be a heterosexual and be sexually attracted to another man, then the definition of heterosexual needs to be changed or add another definition because I don't see anywhere in the dictionary that heterosexuality is also a straight man with exceptions.
   
  (#23 (permalink)) Old
Grizabella Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
Grizabella's Avatar
 
Name: Jessica
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Location: Vancouver

Posts: 1,305
Join Date: January 8th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 17th 2010, 02:09 AM

Perhaps it's not heterosexuality or homosexuality as the "literal" definition, but it's the nature of languages to change. A word only has whatever meaning we give to it, and the definitions of words are always being altered. It's the nature of languages and definitions to alter over time - it can't be stopped, nor should it be, really.


Not around so much now that school's started

"Live a good life.
If there are gods and they are just,
then they will not care how devout you have been,
but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by.
If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them.
If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life
that will live on in the memories of your loved ones."
Marcus Aurelius
   
  (#24 (permalink)) Old
Stupidity Kills
Outside, huh?
**********
 
OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!'s Avatar
 

Posts: 4,500
Blog Entries: 10
Join Date: December 19th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 17th 2010, 02:43 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
That makes sense. But regardless of whether it's 60/40, 80/20, as long as there's numbers on both sides...I consider that bi-sexual. If you date men and women and you're pretty certain of what your sexuality is, regardless of how many women you date compared to men, as long as you date both of them...that's what I consider bi-sexual.
Fair enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
My quote for heterosexuality was "Sexually oriented to persons of the opposite sex". It could be one person, it could be several people. It doesn't say "sexually orientated to all persons of the opposite sex", it just says "persons" of the opposite sex. It could be one person...it could be millions of people. If a man doesn't find a woman attractive, that doesn't mean he's not heterosexual...it means he's a human being.
I think I misread the definition then as I overlooked the "persons" being there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
I'm just saying that if Mr. X wants to be a heterosexual with "exceptions", then that's fine...but that's not being a heterosexual according to the literal definition. it's something else. Something like...heterospectical...heterosexual with special benefits. I don't know. But if being a man could be a heterosexual and be sexually attracted to another man, then the definition of heterosexual needs to be changed or add another definition because I don't see anywhere in the dictionary that heterosexuality is also a straight man with exceptions.
So you're violating the statement you made before about there being only homosexual, heterosexual and bisexual. This is what I mentioned before about having a fourth category instead of editing the definitions of those three categories. The problem I see with editing the definitions to include some leniency is just that, how much leniency. Once this component gets introduced, unless it's an exact number, then it's going to be edited over and over quite fast. Then again, if it is an exact number, then this number has to be based on something. The problem with "semi-heterosexual" is that there's an issue of how much leniency does it allow? If you give a precise answer, then I ask based on what and why not increase or decrease it just a little bit. I'm not against re-defining words, however, if redefining the word will make it more confusing, then either find a definition that's less confusing or make a new word.
   
  (#25 (permalink)) Old
Brandon Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
Brandon's Avatar
 
Name: Brandon
Age: 29
Gender: Male

Posts: 2,540
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 17th 2010, 02:47 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grizabella View Post
Perhaps it's not heterosexuality or homosexuality as the "literal" definition, but it's the nature of languages to change. A word only has whatever meaning we give to it, and the definitions of words are always being altered. It's the nature of languages and definitions to alter over time - it can't be stopped, nor should it be, really.
Well of course, but I bet you that you can walk up to any random person and ask them what a "heterosexual" is, and they'll tell you something along the lines of being "straight", which is liking the member of the opposite sex. It's in the nature of language to change, I'll agree with that, but I can almost guarantee you that a random person is going to say something along the lines of the literal definition of heterosexuality. Bi-sexuality might be a different story, but a heterosexual is a heterosexual and a homosexual is a homosexual.

Quote:
So you're violating the statement you made before about there being only homosexual, heterosexual and bisexual. This is what I mentioned before about having a fourth category instead of editing the definitions of those three categories. The problem I see with editing the definitions to include some leniency is just that, how much leniency. Once this component gets introduced, unless it's an exact number, then it's going to be edited over and over quite fast. Then again, if it is an exact number, then this number has to be based on something. The problem with "semi-heterosexual" is that there's an issue of how much leniency does it allow? If you give a precise answer, then I ask based on what and why not increase or decrease it just a little bit. I'm not against re-defining words, however, if redefining the word will make it more confusing, then either find a definition that's less confusing or make a new word.
Right now, there's only the three simple categories of sexuality (to me at least). But I know that things are subject to change and can accept those changes, so I will not deny the fact that studies can be introduced and sexologists will convince society that there's a fourth category. And I absolutely agree, and that's what my whole point of was with the semi-heterosexuality. I just used that word as a poor example...I probably could've used something much better but I didn't want to think about it too much. But that's what I'm trying to say. If there's a fourth category, then that's fine and it would make sense even though I don't agree with "exceptions", because the definition/meaning of heterosexual and homosexual should be left alone and something should be added to not get things confusing. You can't be a heterosexual but like members of the same sex, but you can be X, someone who mostly is into members of the opposite sex and makes exceptions.

Last edited by Brandon; January 17th 2010 at 02:55 AM.
   
  (#26 (permalink)) Old
Stupidity Kills
Outside, huh?
**********
 
OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!'s Avatar
 

Posts: 4,500
Blog Entries: 10
Join Date: December 19th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 17th 2010, 03:01 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post

Right now, there's only the three simple categories of sexuality (to me at least). But I know that things are subject to change and can accept those changes, so I will not deny the fact that studies can be introduced and sexologists will convince society that there's a fourth category. And I absolutely agree, and that's what my whole point of was with the semi-heterosexuality. I just used that word as a poor example...I probably could've used something much better but I didn't want to think about it too much. But that's what I'm trying to say. If there's a fourth category, then that's fine and it would make sense even though I don't agree with "exceptions", because the definition/meaning of heterosexual and homosexual should be left alone and something should be added to not get things confusing. You can't be a heterosexual but like members of the same sex, but you can be X, someone who mostly is into members of the opposite sex and makes exceptions.
Why not change your outlook on only having those 3 categories? Clearly you believe there is at least one more, so why not bump it up to 4 categories? Why wait for society and science to dictate the change when you're ready for the new category to be introduced beforehand? It makes it sort of hard to comprehend your overall argument because you obviously violate that one premise yet support it in a rather odd way.
   
  (#27 (permalink)) Old
Khadra Offline
got hitched!! <3
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
Khadra's Avatar
 
Name: Kathlene
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Location: Lima, Peru

Posts: 736
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 17th 2010, 03:18 AM

Simply put, I think people should date whomever they want and forget about labels. We donīt understand everything behind sexuality and attraction. The only thing we really know is when weīre happy, so we should just date whomever makes us happy.


It's not socialism. It's CIVILIZATION.
- a woman from Denmark (the happiest country on Earth)


Once you choose hope, anything is possible - Christopher Reeves

Drop a pm in my box if you ever need anything. I'll always do my best to help! <3
   
  (#28 (permalink)) Old
Brandon Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
Brandon's Avatar
 
Name: Brandon
Age: 29
Gender: Male

Posts: 2,540
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 17th 2010, 03:23 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by !!!YOU'RE$NUCKING$FUTZ!!! View Post
Why not change your outlook on only having those 3 categories? Clearly you believe there is at least one more, so why not bump it up to 4 categories? Why wait for society and science to dictate the change when you're ready for the new category to be introduced beforehand? It makes it sort of hard to comprehend your overall argument because you obviously violate that one premise yet support it in a rather odd way.
Negative. I don't believe that there's a fourth category, but just because I don't believe it doesn't mean that other people don't. If the majority of people one day believe that there's a fourth category, while I'm against it, then it's something that I can accept. Just because I can accept something doesn't mean that I believe in it. I'm thinking realistically because what's my opinion on everyone elses? Just because I'm against it doesn't mean that everyone should be against it and go against allowing a fourth category for sexuality. Just because I say that there is no exception to sexuality doesn't mean I'm right or wrong, it's just a matter of opinion. All along, throughout this thread, I believe that I made it very clear that I don't see how there can be exceptions...and I still stand by that. I've been arguing against "exceptions" this whole time.

Quote:
Simply put, I think people should date whomever they want and forget about labels. We donīt understand everything behind sexuality and attraction. The only thing we really know is when weīre happy, so we should just date whomever makes us happy.
Whenever there's a homosexual/heterosexual debate, someone usually says something almost exactly like this. And I can't say that I don't disagree, but it is in human nature to label. It's like saying "we should all date each other for our personalities instead of our looks"...it's a nice idea, but human nature tells us it ain't happening...at least not anytime soon.

Last edited by Brandon; January 17th 2010 at 03:28 AM.
   
  (#29 (permalink)) Old
Khadra Offline
got hitched!! <3
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
Khadra's Avatar
 
Name: Kathlene
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Location: Lima, Peru

Posts: 736
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 17th 2010, 03:40 AM

Whenever there's a homosexual/heterosexual debate, someone usually says something almost exactly like this. And I can't say that I don't disagree, but it is in human nature to label. It's like saying "we should all date each other for our personalities instead of our looks"...it's a nice idea, but human nature tells us it ain't happening...at least not anytime soon.


I disagree with the whole notion of "human nature". Maybe labelling comes natural to us, but that doesnīt mean itīs okay to do it. Human beings are able to think and feel beyond instinct.

As for your example, people canīt really control who they are attracted to. Sure, we could force oursleves to date someone who we are not physically attracted to but had a good personality, but we wouldnīt be happy, so why do it? People can, however, stop labelling people and still be perfectly happy.


It's not socialism. It's CIVILIZATION.
- a woman from Denmark (the happiest country on Earth)


Once you choose hope, anything is possible - Christopher Reeves

Drop a pm in my box if you ever need anything. I'll always do my best to help! <3
   
  (#30 (permalink)) Old
Brandon Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
Brandon's Avatar
 
Name: Brandon
Age: 29
Gender: Male

Posts: 2,540
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 17th 2010, 04:31 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Khadra View Post
Whenever there's a homosexual/heterosexual debate, someone usually says something almost exactly like this. And I can't say that I don't disagree, but it is in human nature to label. It's like saying "we should all date each other for our personalities instead of our looks"...it's a nice idea, but human nature tells us it ain't happening...at least not anytime soon.


I disagree with the whole notion of "human nature". Maybe labelling comes natural to us, but that doesnīt mean itīs okay to do it. Human beings are able to think and feel beyond instinct.

As for your example, people canīt really control who they are attracted to. Sure, we could force oursleves to date someone who we are not physically attracted to but had a good personality, but we wouldnīt be happy, so why do it? People can, however, stop labelling people and still be perfectly happy.
As a human, I can admit that not everything we do is "okay", but regardless of whether labeling is good or not, it's still human nature to label. And since it's in human nature, it's almost impossible (if not impossible) to control. Where does a microwave go? Where does a bed go? Where does a television go? There's reasons why we label, but the main thing is that we do it BECAUSE it's in our nature. And because it's in our nature, it's part of who we are.

It's like saying...I don't like water, so let's get rid of water. Supposedly, you can't get rid of water. The water we've been drinking probably has been the very same water that dinosaurs or even cavemen drank. And like water, you can't really get rid or our nature of labeling.

And since it's in our nature, we can't really control our nature of labeling. Sure, there might be some things that you don't label...well, he's just a guy that wears black eyeliner...no big deal. However, we label a lot of things and we might not even be aware that we're labeling. We can't control who we're attracted to, and we also can't control labeling.

We could also ditch our SUVs and ride scooters and still be perfectly happy, but the world has changed...for better or for worse.
   
  (#31 (permalink)) Old
Khadra Offline
got hitched!! <3
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
Khadra's Avatar
 
Name: Kathlene
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Location: Lima, Peru

Posts: 736
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 17th 2010, 05:14 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
As a human, I can admit that not everything we do is "okay", but regardless of whether labeling is good or not, it's still human nature to label. And since it's in human nature, it's almost impossible (if not impossible) to control. Where does a microwave go? Where does a bed go? Where does a television go? There's reasons why we label, but the main thing is that we do it BECAUSE it's in our nature. And because it's in our nature, it's part of who we are.

It's like saying...I don't like water, so let's get rid of water. Supposedly, you can't get rid of water. The water we've been drinking probably has been the very same water that dinosaurs or even cavemen drank. And like water, you can't really get rid or our nature of labeling.

And since it's in our nature, we can't really control our nature of labeling. Sure, there might be some things that you don't label...well, he's just a guy that wears black eyeliner...no big deal. However, we label a lot of things and we might not even be aware that we're labeling. We can't control who we're attracted to, and we also can't control labeling.

We could also ditch our SUVs and ride scooters and still be perfectly happy, but the world has changed...for better or for worse.
I completely disagree that itīs impossible to change. In fact, I think itīs quite simple. Like any habit, it takes a little time to form and then itīs done. At first people would have to remind themselves not to label other people, but then it would become natural. Some things need labels. We do need to be able to communicate with eachother. I just donīt think sexuality is one of those things. Why do people need to know about the sex of people you are generally attracted to or more attracted to and whether you are following that or not? Itīs completely unecessary.


It's not socialism. It's CIVILIZATION.
- a woman from Denmark (the happiest country on Earth)


Once you choose hope, anything is possible - Christopher Reeves

Drop a pm in my box if you ever need anything. I'll always do my best to help! <3
   
  (#32 (permalink)) Old
Brandon Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
Brandon's Avatar
 
Name: Brandon
Age: 29
Gender: Male

Posts: 2,540
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: "Exceptions" - January 17th 2010, 05:51 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Khadra View Post


I completely disagree that itīs impossible to change. In fact, I think itīs quite simple. Like any habit, it takes a little time to form and then itīs done. At first people would have to remind themselves not to label other people, but then it would become natural. Some things need labels. We do need to be able to communicate with eachother. I just donīt think sexuality is one of those things. Why do people need to know about the sex of people you are generally attracted to or more attracted to and whether you are following that or not? Itīs completely unecessary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khadra View Post
In fact, I think itīs quite simple.
Is this a fact, or is this just a matter of opinion?

If we were talking about masturbation or watching too much television, then we'd be dealing with habits...but we're talking about labeling which, I believe, is different than habits. Would you call our sexual desires habits? I sure wouldn't. Labeling isn't any different than sexual desires. We are humans, and it's in our nature to label...just as having sexual desires is our nature. We can't change our sexual desires, but we can control them. Still, controlling our nature to label doesn't mean it's not there.

And like our nature to label and our nature to have sexual desires, it's also in human nature to want to understand. People want to know what your sexuality is because they just...want to know. Does the Loch Ness Monster really exist? Let's drain the lake to find out. Does Big foot exist? Is there something going on in the Bermuda Triangle? Does God exist? How will we die? Will the world end in 2012? Was 9/11 a conspiracy? Is so-and-so a homosexual? Is X single? Why can't I lose weight? Etc etc. If we didn't seek to understand, we probably wouldn't be living like we are now. Not everything we do is necessary, but we do it because we're just human beings.


   
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Tags
exceptions

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




All material copyright Đ1998-2019, TeenHelp.
Terms | Legal | Privacy | Conduct | Complaints

Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000-2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search engine optimization by vBSEO.
Theme developed in association with vBStyles.