No 'Straight' or 'Hetero' tags ?

Jan 23, 2017 4:50 AM

Offline

Feb 2010

34616

Yamichan said:

LouM said:
becuase Yaoi and Yuri are "specials"
Not sure if you know but society thinks that Heterosexuality is Normal while G/L/B/T aren't and dont say that you dont care about what society says because you are part of the society but most likely in the Miniority

Yuri and Yaoi are not "specials" and heterosexuality is not normal, that is just the society that is wrong to make people think that

Statistically speaking the majority will always be considered the norm and minorities 'special cases'. That's just math and has nothing to do with attaching any sort of moral value to being 'normal'. The latter is retarded, but it absolutely makes sense that for any given category the 10% should have special tags, not the 90%. Just much more efficient.

I probably regret this post by now.

Jan 23, 2017 6:53 AM

#52

dustyhulk

Offline

May 2016

14

lady_freyja said:

dustyhulk said:

But it's not "society" that "thinks" hetero is the norm, it's biology. If Yaoi and Yuri are normal we'd be close to extinction.

Edit: Actually since same sex couples would not reproduce, there would skyrocketing selective pressure for heterosexuality since only those reproduce and homosexuality would deviants from the products from hetro sexual reproduction. That is why homosexuality will and always will be a minority unless artificial breeding is introduced into the equation.

Please stop with those pseudo "biology" stuffs. If only because you assume that monogamy is "natural", while actually very few species are monogamous. Polygamy was actually quite common in human societies until recently. Monogamy is a societal rule, not a biological one.
And it is actually the monogamy which "force" us to be either "heterosexual" or "homosexual". When you remove the monogamy, you can have sex with both genders without any reproduction issue.

1. Pseudo-Biology? Evolution is pseudo-biology? Did I ever say anything that is not scientifically reasonable? If you can't reproduce you can't spread your genetic material, is that not self-explanatory?

2. Please stop with your strawmans. Where does my post assume monogamy? Have I ever mentioned monogamy? Why are you talking about monogamy? It is you who wants to complain about monogamy or make the point about mongamous relationships. I am talking about sexual dimorphism and sexual reproduction, why does that imply monogamy and not also polygamy? Like you said, polygamy is the norm but it is HETEROSEXUAL polygamy that is the norm, at least for western culture which IS the dominant culture in the global scale.

3. How does monogamy force us to be heterosexual or homosexual?! Two logical fallacies here. 1. False dichotomy. You can always leave your male partner and find a female one or vice versa. 2. Correlation IS NOT CAUSATION. We didn't become mainly heterosexual because we had one partner...as you said monogamous relationships were not prevalent

4. Sexual dimorphism (divergence of biological characteristics between two types, like male and female) is almost always (if not always) accompanied with HETEROSEXUALITY. That's the POINT of evolving into different sexes, or we'd be like sea horses or we'd reproduce asexually.

I don't understand your obsession over complaining about monogamy ruining polyamorous relationships. What you need to understand is that I am by all means supportive of polyamorous/polysexual relationships, but I am pointing out the simple FACT that most people are NOT both hetero AND homosexual and by simple SELECTIVE PRESSURE those who CAN reproduce will overshadow those who CANNOT. Unless you brainwash everyone into becoming polysexual beings heterosexuality will ALWAYS be the BIOLOGICAL and SOCIETAL norm. If you can pinpoint what biological concepts I have abused or used wrongly feel free, but don;t just put up a strawman argument to try (and fail) to make me look bad.

dustyhulkJan 23, 2017 6:57 AM

Jan 23, 2017 8:17 AM

#53

Yamichan

Offline

Jul 2015

40

dustyhulk said:

lady_freyja said:

Please stop with those pseudo "biology" stuffs. If only because you assume that monogamy is "natural", while actually very few species are monogamous. Polygamy was actually quite common in human societies until recently. Monogamy is a societal rule, not a biological one.
And it is actually the monogamy which "force" us to be either "heterosexual" or "homosexual". When you remove the monogamy, you can have sex with both genders without any reproduction issue.

1. Pseudo-Biology? Evolution is pseudo-biology? Did I ever say anything that is not scientifically reasonable? If you can't reproduce you can't spread your genetic material, is that not self-explanatory?

2. Please stop with your strawmans. Where does my post assume monogamy? Have I ever mentioned monogamy? Why are you talking about monogamy? It is you who wants to complain about monogamy or make the point about mongamous relationships. I am talking about sexual dimorphism and sexual reproduction, why does that imply monogamy and not also polygamy? Like you said, polygamy is the norm but it is HETEROSEXUAL polygamy that is the norm, at least for western culture which IS the dominant culture in the global scale.

3. How does monogamy force us to be heterosexual or homosexual?! Two logical fallacies here. 1. False dichotomy. You can always leave your male partner and find a female one or vice versa. 2. Correlation IS NOT CAUSATION. We didn't become mainly heterosexual because we had one partner...as you said monogamous relationships were not prevalent

4. Sexual dimorphism (divergence of biological characteristics between two types, like male and female) is almost always (if not always) accompanied with HETEROSEXUALITY. That's the POINT of evolving into different sexes, or we'd be like sea horses or we'd reproduce asexually.

I don't understand your obsession over complaining about monogamy ruining polyamorous relationships. What you need to understand is that I am by all means supportive of polyamorous/polysexual relationships, but I am pointing out the simple FACT that most people are NOT both hetero AND homosexual and by simple SELECTIVE PRESSURE those who CAN reproduce will overshadow those who CANNOT. Unless you brainwash everyone into becoming polysexual beings heterosexuality will ALWAYS be the BIOLOGICAL and SOCIETAL norm. If you can pinpoint what biological concepts I have abused or used wrongly feel free, but don;t just put up a strawman argument to try (and fail) to make me look bad.

Scientifically speaking, and so theoretically speaking, I guess you are right.
Except one point : I don't believe people usually have such a reflection, they just act as they are told to by society (not necessarily in explicit ways).
Assuming that people will always make the most logical choice is the only flaw I could see in what you said ^^

Jan 23, 2017 9:56 AM

#54

removed-user

Offline

Jul 2018

561864

@dustyhulk

Maybe you'll understand my point of view better (not agreeing with, understanding) knowing that I don't think that sexual preferences are 100% from biological origins, but a mixture of biological (genetics and hormones mostly) and societal (and psychological) origins.

Scientifically speaking, we don't know the exact causes of the homosexual behaviors, so I think I have some rights to believe in what I believe. While knowing that my belief is a supposition, not the truth.

Starting from that belief, societal norms are affecting our sexual preferences. From what I understand of the few societies which were both polygamous and more or less tolerant about homosexual behavior (Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome, Japan prior its "modernization"…), what we call "bisexuality" was more common than in our current society.
While our current society, being monogamous, force us to choose a, only one, partner, ideally "for life", and obviously that partner can't be from the two genders at the same time. Although that pressure loosened in recent history with the divorce stuffs, some mores liberations and all.

There is also the comparison to our cousin species, the great apes, it happens that bisexuality is here extremely common.
Usually, close species from an evolutionary/genetical standpoint share a lot of common traits, notably behavioral traits.

That's why I consider that "heterosexuality" being a "biological norm" is doubtful at best. I do think that bisexuality is the "natural" (normal) sexual behavior in the human species, not a 50/50% bisexuality of course, but that very few people are really "100% hetero/homo".

Because in your initial message, you are saying exactly this:

False dichotomy. You can always leave your male partner and find a female one or vice versa.

That if heterosexuality wasn't the "biological norm", we would be on the brink of extinction.
But we can be bisexual.
That's what bothered me in your initial post, that false dichotomy.

My answer was definitely too aggressive, so I apologize for it.

PS: I don't care about monogamy or polygamy, I actually have a monogamous behavior. I mentioned the poly/monogamy in order to illustrate the influence of societal norms on our sexual behaviors. It was maybe uncalled, since I don't have anthropological evidences in order to support that thesis.

Jan 23, 2017 10:22 AM

#55

dustyhulk

Offline

May 2016

14

@lady_freyja

I only complained about you mentioning monogamy because I never mentioned it so it seemed irrelevant to me. (I actually support polyamorous relationships)

To address your points on bisexuality, from what I know there is clear sexual dimorphism from most species (vertebrates at least). Bisexuality is not so rare to the point where we should dismiss them as exceptions but not so prevalent that you can make a case to say that it is the "normal" behaviour.
For humans, from what I know, most bisexuality comes from upper class noblemen who have elicit relations with their manservants or something of that sort, rather than being an actual norm in Ancient Greece, Rome. (I don't know about Japan) Most people (aka peasants) don't practise bisexuality.

Just to clear up, what I actually mean (If I didn't make it clear enough or if you misunderstood me) about 'biological' norm is NOT to say that homoseuxality/bisexuality is not grounded in biological grounds and it being a simple product of "nurturing".

lady_freyja said:
sexual preferences are 100% from biological origins, but a mixture of biological (genetics and hormones mostly) and societal (and psychological) origins.

This is not something I'm inclined to disagree with. I absolutely think this is the most plausible explanation. What I meant was, not that people are 100% heterosexual, but since heterosexuality (it doesn't matter if they are bisexual or not, they are still hetero+homo) is the only way of reproduction, only heterosexual people reproduce and carry on their genes. So there is a big (big is an understatement) inclination to select heterosexuality.

At least for humans today, there doesn't seem to be any serious threat to the 'biological norm' for heterosexuality. It seems like I gave off the wrong impression of meaning "heterosexuality is the normal thing, the right thing for us", which is not what I'm saying. I simply mean it is the PREVALENT behaviour and it doesn't seem to have a big chance of changing for now.

Edit: I guess we got off with the wrong foot, I also apologise for the aggressive response.

Jan 23, 2017 11:13 AM

#56

Yamichan

Offline

Jul 2015

40

Since we are talking about science stuff, I'm wondering why nature made females unable to clone themselves. I mean, the only thing they could not give to their children is a Y chromosome, and it's obviously not necessary to live, so if the main focus of species is perpetuity, it would ensure that. No diversity inside the same species, yes, but does that matter that much ?

Jan 23, 2017 2:58 PM

#57

_Sofi_

Offline

Feb 2016

2057

It's because gay relationships are generally less common than straight relationships. Straight relationships are much more visible in both Anime and in real life, and as such the "Yaoi" and "Yuri" designations are important to distinguish between the two.

Jan 23, 2017 7:15 PM

#58

_Ako_

Offline

Feb 2015

13871

Dude, you just suck at looking which are the traps and which are the real one.

RIP CE, thank you and fuck you for bringing Rule 7 that ultimately killed you and this shithole

Jan 23, 2017 10:38 PM

#59

Yamichan

Offline

Jul 2015

40

_Ako_ said:
Dude, you just suck at looking which are the traps and which are the real one.

Ahah, maybe yes ^^

Jan 23, 2017 10:50 PM

#60

waalex11

Offline

Dec 2009

9811

Seriously? I bet someone already answered but.
If it's straight romance, it just says romance with no other genre like yaoi, or yuri, etc.

Haha fucking noob, no offense.
Is this even serious or is this trolling bait?

Jan 24, 2017 4:55 PM

#61

elkensteyin

elk sensei

Offline

Oct 2013

8810

Brb said:
Wouldn't it be obvious? The lack of yaoi or yuri would imply it...

^ @Yamichan - not sure how you can get a better answer than this.

Besides, all the ideological discussion about hetero or homo really doesn't belong in this thread

Jan 24, 2017 5:47 PM

#62

dustyhulk

Offline

May 2016

14

Yamichan said:
Since we are talking about science stuff, I'm wondering why nature made females unable to clone themselves. I mean, the only thing they could not give to their children is a Y chromosome, and it's obviously not necessary to live, so if the main focus of species is perpetuity, it would ensure that. No diversity inside the same species, yes, but does that matter that much ?

When most animals prefer sticking their ding dongs into damp holes as a type of reproduction, and even plants that can't move 'have sex' (e.g. flowers) you know there is a reason behind.
Asexual (meaning non sexual) reproduction (cloning is a type of it) has the disadvantage of having little to no genetic variation. This is mitigated through mutation, but it only really works if you clone in astronomical amounts like bacteria. If humans just did this, at no realistic rate of reproduction (we are talking about bacteria splitting into two 'babies' in matter of minutes) can we have any noticeable mutation and thus genetic difference.

You asked if it matters that much. Yes, because the very process of evolution will halt indefinitely. We will no longer be able to adapt (remember that evolution is the result of RANDOM mutation), unless we manipulate genes artificially. Possibly we can keep inventing technology to keep us alive, but superbugs (this is an ongoing issue that might cause our extinction if we are not careful), viruses, and every other 'hostile' organism on this planet will continue to evolve against our technology while out DNA stays the same. This is like playing chess with 8 pawns down (you lose end game!)

TLDR: Genetic variation in asexual reproduction depends on rate of mutation. Rate of mutation is proportional to rate of reproduction. We don't reproduce fast enough to make a noticeable rate of mutation. No genetic variation=NO EVOLUTION=WE ARE FUCKED.

dustyhulkJan 24, 2017 5:57 PM

Jan 24, 2017 9:50 PM

#63

tsudecimo

Offline

Dec 2012

24355

It doesn't have anything to do with normal or not. Yaoi, yuri etc are just genres of manga. For example if there is a gay relationship in a manga that isn't about gay relationship it won't have a yuri/yaoi tag.

» Allow us to filter out chinese snimation. brokencounter - Feb 18, 2024	12	by Shishio-kun »» 1 hour ago
» To Make Manga List Updating More Convenient Saintseiya100 - Yesterday	0	by Saintseiya100 »» Yesterday, 10:52 AM
» An option to see which users have favorited a series or characters JKKH - Oct 7	2	by Shishio-kun »» Oct 13, 1:07 PM
» new list option - "Maybe" dailydi - Oct 12	8	by Shishio-kun »» Oct 13, 7:25 AM
» Yearly Wrapped like MyDramaList ? ame - Sep 6	13	by ScaryOwl »» Oct 11, 10:47 AM

No 'Straight' or 'Hetero' tags ?

More topics from this board

» Allow us to filter out chinese snimation.

» To Make Manga List Updating More Convenient

» An option to see which users have favorited a series or characters

» new list option - "Maybe"

» Yearly Wrapped like MyDramaList ?

MoreTop Anime

MoreTop Airing Anime

MoreMost Popular Characters