Quote:
Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop
"if you are diabetic( HHB f.ex), you shouldn't eat too much sugar", would you accuse me of calling you a diabetic?
|
Now you're just doing it wrong. For your analogy to work, you would have to construct the sentence like this :
"if you (HHB f.ex) are diabetic, you shouldn't eat too much sugar"
That's basically the way my first sentence was constructed. When it says "(HHB f.ex)", that clearly indicates an example of a person who might be diabetic. There's nothing there that states you are, just like there's nothing in the first sentence that says you feel a specific way.
Anyways, why not debate semantics? It's not like you've responded or commented much on the more serious arguments in my posts, for example on morality or the fact that any large and healthy population of humans will have a gay minority.
edit :
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paloma
What does "gender non-conforming" have to do with sexual orientation....
|
If people who turn out to be gay do not conform to gender associated behaviours in very early childhood, that indicates those children are gay (differing in behaviour from heterosexuals) before they experience sexual attraction. Basically, it just strengthens the notion that gay people at large don't choose to be gay; rather they are born that way.