why is it so hard for humans to accept homosexuality??

One big reason is homophobic religious ideas. Another is just not understanding it. If someone's straight and they don't understand or relate to people's homosexual attraction, then that's fine with me. I don't really understand what makes men attractive to people, for instance. What isn't right is when people are fearful of what they don't know or understand. As in "this is different so I don't like it!"

 

You have heard the adage, people fear what they do not understand. What is a minority, what is unusual, that is hard to understand for many people. Particularly when they've been conditioned all their lives to believing something can only be a certain way (e.g. men can only be attracted to women and vice versa).

Furthermore, people do not tend to question these accepted beliefs unless they are given a reason to. So if someone was raised in a generally intolerant region, and they'd never met a gay person in their life, they'd probably be intolerant. Because they never really thought about it, and the general feeling around them is that it is somehow "bad."

Education is key. And you have to give respect to get respect. Change people's minds by being true to yourself and by holding your head up high. Making a difference isn't about giving society the middle finger, it is about showing through the way you live - that there is nothing wrong with being LGBT. That harmony between people is possible, and that everyone deserves respect and love no matter what. But we have to take the first step.

 

I think Kodo hit the heart of the matter.

Most homophobia (in my humble opinion) is based on ignorance.

Understand and discussion of the true nature of sexuality is suppressed in most places in the world. Even in 'liberal' Western countries, the sexuality that is taught in schools often doesn't address the true nature of either gender identity or sexual orientation. Since the majority of the population is heterosexual (as far as we know), it's not unreasonable that heterosexuals aren't basically interested in learning things that either 'don't concern them' or may, in fact 'cause them to question their own sexuality.'

Also, there is the issue of same-sex sexual activities. Many guys either don't mind the idea of two women interacting sexually or even embracing it (often only as long as the guy is still the center of focus in the threesome). However, when the idea of two guys interacting sexually comes up, MANY fewer people are accepting. Again, to me, that is basically ignorance. There is only one primary sexual activity that only a male and female can have that two same-sex couples can't: sexual intercourse (p in v).

My 2cents.

 

I still say it comes down to evolutionary reasons. Humans are "expected" to reproduce and contribute to their societies, so religious, sexist, and other reasons are just icing on the cake. Not to mention that for most of history, it wasn't something understood as being an innate part of a person. We tended to see them as being related to certain acts or professions. A lot of people feel "threatened" to see a group that has traditionally been maligned becoming more visible and gaining ground, especially in recent years.

 

i hasn't always been this way. even now places where christianity or islam haven't managed to break in there is still no stigma or hardly any against (male) homosexuals. it's the case of japan and south korea for example. japanese, ancient greek and roman literalture all have examples of depictions of homosexual romances which testifies how natural it was considered. it was a common practice somewhere and at some point in greece for mentors to engange in sexual relations with their male students (i don't know why and i'm definitely not encouraging this last thing to take place ever again). so the answer to your question may be for a big part religion. it's also kind of accepted among psychologists that homophobes are actually gay or bi or in any way insecure about their masculinity, and need to disparage homosexuals in order to enforce it by opposing what they perceive as effeminate. in american culture where everything revolves around manliness all of this is exacerbated. if you want i can share links to wikipedia pages axplaining all of this much better than i can. at least thsi is about male homosexuality. females during most of history only had a duty to procreate and not hte freedom to have extramarital relationships.

---------- Post added 14th May 2017 at 02:56 PM ----------

i dont' think so. homosexuality has been more often accepted then not throughout history. the main reason why it's oppressed might be religion. as far as i know it has only happened during chrisitanity and islam

---------- Post added 14th May 2017 at 03:03 PM ----------

a russian? is my english that bad?

---------- Post added 14th May 2017 at 03:03 PM ----------

a russian? is my english that bad?

---------- Post added 14th May 2017 at 03:03 PM ----------

a russian? is my english that bad?

 

I hate being that guy, but religion, specifically Abrahamic faiths are largely responsible for this--but that's not to say there aren't sects or branches that are accepting either.

 

Daydreamer, I agree with your sentiments, however, I will point out that Islamic faiths are (in my experience) much more uniformly adamant about it.

 

I don't really have that problem here. In Oregon, people are pretty accepting.

 

Religion is a huge reason why. People think that not being able to reproduce through sex is a wrong act (but then wouldn't oral sex and intercourse with protection between straight couples also be wrong?).

A lot of homophobia is also caused by sexism. In the case of gay men, being penetrated and liking men was considered a "woman's role", which people view as something that degrades men as a whole. There is a lot of push toward hyper masculinity and men feeling threatened by any role that goes against it.

Lesbians are sometimes discriminated against for sexist reasons as well, but in different ways. In our case, It's believing that every woman's sole purpose is to exist for a man's benefit and pleasure. By excluding men from the picture, it threatens these social roles.

 

gravechild, i can't post in my wall because my post count is still too low. i'm not actually from buryatia, i jsut chose un unlikely location as a joke. living there would sure be interesting but ufortunately i don't. ethnic buryatians are linguistically related to mongolians but not to yakutians, whose language is oddly related to turkishand other syberian languages. i'm a a bit fan of eastern russian coultures and i'm surprised whenever somebody knows anything about them. i was shocked to see sheldon cooper perform some tuvan throat singng. but sorry to disappoint you, i don't live any close to those places

---------- Post added 16th May 2017 at 02:44 PM ----------

let's see if this one mor epost will allow me to reply to you in hte wall

 

I think it's really important to get our definitions right (is the homophobia we're talking about at any given point referring to an irrational response or a set of cultural institutions?) as well as not essentialising homophobia to a single point of origin.

If we're talking about a physically violent response to male homosexuality, then that might be true. But it's quite clear that in historically and currently Christian nations (eg. the UK, Germany, Argentina) there's a greater level of active acceptance than in Japan and South Korea, where a silent condemnation pushes gay couples out of the mainstream. It's harder to talk about it and harder to live as an equal.

That's a significantly worse stigma in terms of everyday participation in society, which indicates that there's something more going on than the presence of monotheistic religion.

Those depictions don't place homosexuality on the same level as heterosexuality in those cultures, however. It's important not to draw too close a comparison with the modern, Western acceptance of homosexuality as socially and institutionally equal to heterosexuality with what were essentially relationships of power - the Japanese, Greek and Roman examples all involve very specific power dynamics. It also doesn't imply naturalness in the sense that we might consider it now - it could very much come down to a sense of ownership rather than the normalisation of equal sexual partners of the same sex.

They also don't fit into the same framework as modern conceptions of romantic love or institutions such as marriage. That definitional flexibility, in how sexuality has been perceived between cultures and time periods, probably shows there's nothing very essential about social responses to sexuality.

Homophobia as a visceral, emotional response to homosexuality has a correlation with being closeted, because it sparks a very real sense of guilt and fear of exposure. Homophobia as a society-wide condemnation of homosexuality is very different from the sort of homophobia you're talking about.

There is something of a relation between fears about how undermining of gender roles leads to irrational homophobia (eg. straight men terrified of losing arbitrary power over women lash out irrationally) but that definitely doesn't amount to being closeted.

TL;DR - Homophobia is entirely dependent on cultural context but it's a bad idea to assume that not murdering gays is a sign of acceptance or to universalise modern language of sexuality to ancient practices.

 

Because being gay is rare, and heteros can't really see themselves in a gay relationship, just like gays can't see themselves in a hetero relationship. They can't really relate to it, so it seems foreign at first glance.

 

All of you above have presented great points, just thought I'd put something out semi-related...

Some religious arguments against homosexuality are because homosexual acts do not cause reproduction... these same religions *COUGH Roman Catholicism COUGH* ban the use of contraception ,having sex with the purpose of reproduction, and having abortions.

The argument is that you are not allowing someone to live. Isn't abstaining from sex also a way of preventing life? Surely in the case of men at least, every day we don't sleep with as many women as we can and try and ensure they get pregnant, we are preventing some babies being born, by the Catholic argument, "killing" them.

So, if they really meant all that "man-woman relations are for the purpose of reproduction" stuff, then they would be advising guys to be slutty as possible

Whatever. Peace.

 

Because people have been educated to be this way.

If we taught every single child that homosexuality is fine - problem solved.

Internalized homophobia varies depending on how deeply ingrained the "brainwashing" was.

There are also those people who've been told homosexuality is the worst thing ever, but still don't mind it. Those people have an intelligence (above average) that allows them to empathize and understand things on their own.

In conclusion, a bad upbringing and ignorance most of the time leads to homophobia and bigotry.

 

Another reason is that some people keep teaching kids that gay = evil. Living in a place where people try to force others to conform to existing norms doesn't allow for deviation from that ignorant teaching. I can't stand the mentality of conform or rejection. Do they really want everyone to be the same? How boring is that? It's really pathetic some people push the lie that gay = evil. I feel so bad for their kids and anyone who has to be around them. They must think that people learn to be gay so if they can keep others from knowing about LGBT people and that we're evil then they'll just be straight.

People need to mind their own business and accept others for who they are.

 

One word: Religion.

 

Religion is indeed a factor. I say this as someone who places the utmost value in my Christian Faith. But for those who do seek to live according to the Bible, the most straightforward interpretation of the scriptures is that homosexual acts are indeed sinful. Now, that being said, those scriptures can be interpreted in a different light if a few assumptions are allowed. I personally believe that it's up to each person of faith to decide what the Bible communicates concerning the subject (or any subject for that matter), and then they must decide what they must do or not do in light of that information.

It's definitely a difficult place to be in as a Christian who takes his faith seriously and yet still has undeniable homosexual feelings. Everyone is entitled to his or her own beliefs, and I'm a strong believer in showing other people the same amount of grace that Jesus depicted in the Bible. I do implore LGBTQ people to not think there is no value whatsoever in religion simply because it possibly says some controversial things about homosexuality. Religion can be complicated, but it's not necessarily evil. Not by a long shot.

 

There's a lot more than that though... All the genocide, slavery, senseless killings, literally selling victims to their rapists, "Women are just breeding cows" sexism, burning, pillaging, stoning, human sacrifice, kill the children to punish the parents, etc... All that is fine, but mixed fabrics and working on Sunday are horrible crimes.

I read the book seeking morality, it's not what I ended up with in conclusion. A lot of people take these as infallible truth and it divides people, it teaches you not to question. When issues of slavery, racism, sexism, homophobia come up in the US, they always turn to the "Good book" to justify it.

I don't mean to derail or get ironically "preachy", I just wanted to point out it's far from the first time it's pulled morality in the wrong direction. It was written a very long time ago before morality had any real foundation, and throughout history and even today it's used as a barrier to halt it's advancement. To note a recent example, Mike "Shock the gays" Pence getting VP.

Sorry if that seems like a bit much, touchy subject. I said a lot of nasty things back when I believed, and finally sat down and read the book to justify it... Only it didn't. It still hurts to remember all the vile things in there, they would always read it aloud in Sunday school and just skip over those parts...

Many people are just too cemented on the ideas they were raised with, afraid to seek answers from different sources. When these ideas are so old and outdated, people become afraid of advancement, afraid of the future. Homophobia and sexism are the result of that; relics of the past that refuse to evolve or die.

I apologize again for ranting. I don't want anyone becoming as vehement as I once was, putting down others to conceal my true colours and appear acceptable to my family.

Admitting it was indeed a factor however, takes courage. Courage I didn't have.

 

Kira, I do not in any way invalidate your feelings or your experience in the matter. Religion, especially Christianity, is far from the squeaky clean, watered down version that often gets preached in Sunday school. There are difficult passages in the Word just as there are difficult moments in life. Reading the Bible will expose you to every shortcoming and every horror that humanity is capable of. But in the midst of all that chaos and all that stuff that we just sometimes cannot understand is a God who is unflinchingly, eternally committed to saving us.

The message that God loves us and wants to save us and secure a meaningful relationship with us is present from Genesis through to Revelation. There are challenging moments in between. There are ways in which God works that leave us baffled. There are times everything in us wants to revolt against what we are reading. But through all of that, God's loving and unfolding plan of salvation is always present.

"While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." - Romans 5:8