Why I identify as homosexual even while living chastely

[michelleds]

“When I think of the loneliness he has suffered (something Dr. Rick mentioned rather eloquently last night), I ache to think of how we could have all helped him earlier with this, had he felt free to ‘come out’ about his confusion, neediness, alternating attractions, etc.”

The issue of loneliness is, I think, a big one in relation to homosexuality – a lot of people who ID as gay are people who, like myself and the OP, simply “felt” different from a very young age, and with that feeling of difference there are also often feelings of isolation, the sense that other people don’t understand, and especially a difficulty relating to other people of the same sex (it’s weird – even now, I can walk into a room filled with people and I’ll feel awkward talking to the other women…except for the lesbian. I’ll gravitate towards her and be comfortably talking in no time. A lot of lesbians I’ve talked to say that straight women just don’t make sense, and I can really understand that.) In any case, as a result it’s very difficult for people who have same-sex attractions to find supportive people to talk to outside of the LGBTQ community, because even when people are theoretically open there’s some sort of barrier there in terms of the way that we experience the world.

While I definitely agree with what you say about the loneliness, I would add “secretiveness” to this. I’m still trying to sort everything out in my own mind, so bear with me here. But in looking back over my teen years–very religious, very Christ-oriented–but could NOT bring myself to talk to any of my peers or youth leaders (some of whom i was very close to) about my feelings about sex, girls, etc. to say i was confused is an understatement, but if i even tried to think about talking about these issues, i would feel my jaw and throat clamp down on it.

I will also say that I have had the exact opposite reactions re the room filled with people. I’m a natural introvert so I’m not going to be the life of the party, but it will most likely be one or two straight women that I’ll spend time with. the lesbian in the room would most likely have made me uncomfortable. and yes, that was even after 20 odd years out of the closet.

I don’t want to say that I’m a paradox, but…

(edited to add: part of my figuring things out in my head includes how to interact with people who are gay here at work and have known me for years. total strangers or ppl who are seeking help or answers or dialogue, I’m good with, but this employment environment is awkward)

 

[Elizabeth502]

as a result it’s very difficult for people who have same-sex attractions to find supportive people to talk to outside of the LGBTQ community, because even when people are theoretically open there’s some sort of barrier there in terms of the way that we experience the world.

Again, so helpful when it comes to understanding why my male relative has had difficulty articulating his sense of separation and awkwardness. (Although in his case, it’s a combination – undoubtedly – of the tentativeness about “where the support will be,” and not really understanding/being aware, etc. of what’s going on inside his head.) I think this latter is also a very important issue and may be (conditional tense!) more of a factor for males than females, overall. (disclaimer as to generality)

 

[Melinda_Selmys]

(Although in his case, it’s a combination – undoubtedly – of the tentativeness about “where the support will be,” and not really understanding/being aware, etc. of what’s going on inside his head.)

It’s pretty understandable that your relative wouldn’t know what was going on inside his head – I’m still not entirely sure that I know what’s going on inside mine. For a long time, I was pretty much willing to shelve all of the issues surrounding my sexuality, ID as straight, pretend that the standard issue psycho-therapy party line was an accurate representation of my experience (you know, the whole Freudian psycho-dynamics of homosexuality shtick), and get on with things. Then I managed to get a book contract, and I actually had to write tens of thousands of words on the issue, and I realized that I had less then ten percent of my own experience worked out – believe me, there’s nothing like a publishing deadline to make you get your inner stuff organized fast
It’s really not an easy thing to work out, because there are so many nuances to attraction/romance/sexuality. It’s not as simple as it’s made out to be: it’s not just a matter of “I am attracted to men/women,” because there are so many different kinds of attraction: physical, aesthetic, intellectual, emotional, spiritual, etc. Because true sexuality involves the “whole person,” all of those vectors of attraction have to somehow be brought together and integrated into a single relationship, which is neither simple nor easy.

 

[Defender1]

Has it ever even crossed your mind that you may be wrong? Entirely wrong?

Tragically in error to think you know God’s intent when He created homosexuals?

Convicted of being as flawed as any other sinner by your own mouth?

I must say you make for a stunning example of man’s fallen state in today’s world?

Speaking absolutely about God’s will and reasons for His creations, is inherently dangerous in my humble opinion, as an admittedly flawed and fallible man.

I believe God loves homosexuals as much as any of us. I may be wrong, but at least I admit it.

jomoco

GOd loves everyone he made he however hates their sin . And you need to know the differences between opinion and fact you are sting your opinion here while I state facts with the bible to back me up . Its Catholic liberals such as many of the ones posting here that are attempting to ruin the Catholic faith and the reputation of the church .

 

[Defender1]

Do you know any actual homosexuals? Anyone who has experimented with homosexuality? Not only does what you’re saying not match what science has learned, but what you’re saying does not fit the people I know. Even if it were true here and there (I’m not convinced of that, but let’s allow the possibility), it certainly is not always true. Knowing them growing up, you could tell they were different, but what they struggled with wasn’t a thing that their parents did to them. Even the heterosexual who experiment with homosexuality (the ones that I know) don’t have their parents treatment of them to trace it to. They were treated the same as their siblings who had no desire in that direction at all.

The Bible speaks in terms of action, not orientation. It does not say, “A man shall not look upon a man as if he were a woman; such a thing is an abomination”. Now, I’m not saying that lust is OK if it is homosexual lust. Of course it is not! I’m saying that the passages you are referring to are about actions. As you point out, it says nothing about women, except that they are not to have sex outside of marriage, either. In effect, what the Bible says is that homosexual sex outside of marriage is not a separate case from other sex outside of marriage.

Note what St. Paul wrote in Romans, too…he is talking about heterosexuals choosing to exchange not only homosexual orientation but homosexual acts for their previous heterosexual relationships. This is not the same as someone who has never had a heterosexual orientation; rather, he was talking about a sexual “fashion” prevalent in the “avante garde” people of his time. He is not talking about someone who has an orientation they never asked for:
Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper.** 1 Rom. 1:26-27**

There is nothing there to suggest that he would not have compassion for someone who had an orientation or a trial they did not choose. There is the opportunity for sin there, too, but it is a very different case.

I know numerous homosexuals and i live now in the South for the last 9 years . Science suggests (key word) does not prove what you say .And I stand by the point that GOd dopes not intentionally make homosexuals . It is a choice. And the verses I cited were against homosexuality . Sodomite sex is homosexual sex (male ) God did not give men those body parts for that .Now I noticed you mentioned female homosexuality.What did God say? Be fertile and multiply ! can two of the same gender do that on their own? No of course not . Now I notice (and it nerves me ) to see so many liberal remarks from so-called Catholics .Marriage is not between a man and a man or woman and woman . It is between a man and a woman . This is because its what God intends not liberal Christians .Remember GOd told man and woman to be fertile and multiply . Now the poster of this post Is a kind hearted person and we went back and forth and said our peace here . Lets not drag this out anymore . I will respond to every liberal Catholic post I receive just so everyone knows .

 

[Defender1]

Haha, no, and I highly doubt anyone here is saying that homosexuals need to go around announcing that they are, or say it in an interview… and neither was that the point of the OP.

None the less, you ARE a heterosexual. Just as some people ARE homosexuals. Whether or not you say it in an interview doesn’t take away or add to the above truth.

Im a troll ?for pointing out truth and giving my view here ? And you claim to be Roman Catholic ? If you hold the views of Pelosi , your only catholic by name.

 

[Debora123]

Im a troll ?for pointing out truth and giving my view here ? And you claim to be Roman Catholic ? If you hold the views of Pelosi , your only catholic by name.

My view of Pelosi?

Actually, my view is the same as that of the Catholic Church. Having a homosexual orientation is not a sin, neither is it a choice. ACTING on it is the sin.

I thought you were a troll because you are completely and utterly wrong about what the Church teaches regarding this issue.

 

[Edward_H]

My view of Peloci?

Actually, my view is the same as that of the Catholic Church. Having a homosexual orientation is not a sin, neither is it a choice. ACTING on it is the sin.

I thought you were a troll because you are completely and utterly wrong about what the Church teaches regarding this issue.

Actually Debora, you’re mistaken in what you think the Church teaches regarding this issue.

Your point about “neither it is a choice”, is your opinion, not shared with the Church.

The Catechism actually reads " Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained."

 

[Debora123]

Actually Debora, you’re mistaken in what you think the Church teaches regarding this issue.

Your point about “neither it is a choice”, is your opinion, not shared with the Church.

The Catechism actually reads " Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained."

Really? So you think people wake up one day and think “jee, I think I’m going to ge ahead and be attracted to the same sex today.” No, Edward, no one CHOOSES to have a homosexual orientation, which is why having a homosexual orientation is not a sin. Only ACTING on it is a sin. And the Church DOES teach this.

Every human being is called to receive a gift of divine sonship, to become a child of God by grace. However, to receive this gift, we must reject sin, including homosexual behavior—that is, acts intended to arouse or stimulate a sexual response regarding a person of the same sex. The Catholic Church teaches that such acts are always violations of divine and natural law.

Homosexual desires, however, are not in themselves sinful. People are subject to a wide variety of sinful desires over which they have little direct control, but these do not become sinful until a person acts upon them, either by acting out the desire or by encouraging the desire and deliberately engaging in fantasies about acting it out.** People tempted by homosexual desires, like people tempted by improper heterosexual desires, are not sinning until they act upon those desires in some manner. **

catholic.com/library/Homosexuality.asp

 

[Edward_H]

Every human being is called to receive a gift of divine sonship, to become a child of God by grace. However, to receive this gift, we must reject sin, including homosexual behavior—that is, acts intended to arouse or stimulate a sexual response regarding a person of the same sex. The Catholic Church teaches that such acts are always violations of divine and natural law.

Homosexual desires, however, are not in themselves sinful. People are subject to a wide variety of sinful desires over which they have little direct control, but these do not become sinful until a person acts upon them, either by acting out the desire or by encouraging the desire and deliberately engaging in fantasies about acting it out.** People tempted by homosexual desires, like people tempted by improper heterosexual desires, are not sinning until they act upon those desires in some manner. **

catholic.com/library/Homosexuality.asp

Right…but your earlier causal statement is not shared by the Church. You’re at plain variance with Church teaching on this point of choice and causation.

 

[Debora123]

Mary Beth Bonacci wrote a book entitled Real Love, and it is based off of the teachings of JPII in the Theology of the Body. It is also a book that depicts the Catholic Church’s stance on sexual matters. Here is from page 122:

There is a difference between having a homosexual orientation and engaging in homosexual activity. Having a homosexual orientation just means that a person is sexually attracted to primarily people of his own sex. It is not something he chooses but rather something that has happened to him.

No one knows exactly why some people develop a sexual attraction to people of the same sex. Some theories say that there are biological or genetic causes, others say a homosexual orientation is developmental, happening as a result of circumstances in a person’s early life. Either way, it is not a sin to be attracted to someone of the same sex. It can’t be a sin, because it isn’t freely chosen.

 

[Debora123]

Right…but your earlier causal statement is not shared by the Church. You’re at plain variance with Church teaching on this point of choice and causation.

What casual statement? My statement was that homosexuality is not chosen. This is true.

 

[Edward_H]

Mary Beth Bonacci wrote a book entitled Real Love, and it is based off of the teachings of JPII in the Theology of the Body. It is also a book that depicts the Catholic Church’s stance on sexual matters. Here is from page 122:

Sorry. A book that you or she argues “is based off…” blah blah blah…is far less direct and shaky than the quote I posted directly from the Catechism.

You need to recalibrate your understanding of Church teaching a bit.

Does a bi-sexual choose to do what they do?
Does a pedophile choose to do what they do?
Does an adulterer choose to do what they do?
Does a married swinger choose to do what they do?
Does a person with a devolving fetish choose to do what they do?
Does a person choose to nurse their imagination?

 

[Debora123]

Sorry. A book that you or she argues “is based off…” blah blah blah…is far less direct and shaky than the quote I posted directly from the Catechism.

You need to recalibrate your understanding of Church teach a bit.

Does a bi-sexual choose to do what they do?
Does a pedophile choose to do what they do?
Does an adulterer choose to do what they do?
Does a married swinger choose to do what they do?
Does a person with a devolving fetish choose to do what they do?
Does a person choose to nurse their imagination?

Lol, are you kidding me?? This wasn’t just some random book she wrote, this is Church teaching. But, whatever, ok, forget the book. ANY knowledgeable Catholic will tell you that the Church teaches that having a homosexual orientation is not a choice.

Here, here’s a source straight from CAF:

Every human being is called to receive a gift of divine sonship, to become a child of God by grace. However, to receive this gift, we must reject sin, including homosexual behavior—that is, acts intended to arouse or stimulate a sexual response regarding a person of the same sex. The Catholic Church teaches that such acts are always violations of divine and natural law.

Homosexual desires, however, are not in themselves sinful. People are subject to a wide variety of sinful desires over which they have little direct control, but these do not become sinful until a person acts upon them, either by acting out the desire or by encouraging the desire and deliberately engaging in fantasies about acting it out. People tempted by homosexual desires, like people tempted by improper heterosexual desires, are not sinning until they act upon those desires in some manner.

 

[Edward_H]

What casual statement? My statement was that homosexuality is not chosen. This is true.

You also said

Actually, my view is the same as that of the Catholic Church. Having a homosexual orientation is not a sin, neither is it a choice. ACTING on it is the sin.

“neither is it a choice” is removing volition as a cause. That’s a causal claim.

Whereas the Church says “Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.”

This is saying the origin/impetus/causes are largely unexplained, not at all ruling out (or in) volition.

You’re therefore at variance with Church teaching.

 

[Edward_H]

Lol, are you kidding me?? This wasn’t just some random book she wrote, this is Church teaching. But, whatever, ok, forget the book. ANY knowledgeable Catholic will tell you that the Church teaches that having a homosexual orientation is not a choice.

Here, here’s a source straight from CAF:

This book is not formal Church teaching. You’re now showing even a poorer understanding than before.

 

[Debora123]

You also said

“neither is it a choice” is removing volition as a cause. That’s a causal claim.

Whereas the Church says “Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.”

This is saying the origin/impetus/causes are largely unexplained, not at all ruling out (or in) volition.

You’re therefore at variance with Church teaching.

Yeah, that’s right. Homosexual orientation is NOT a choice.

No one knows why or how one develops this orientation, but either way, it is NOT a choice.

This IS what the Church teaches.

 

[Edward_H]

Yeah, that’s right. Homosexual orientation is NOT a choice.

No one knows why or how one develops this orientation, but either way, it is NOT a choice.

This IS what the Church teaches.

“Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.” CCC

 

[Debora123]

This book is not formal Church teaching. You’re now showing even a poorer understanding than before.

It depicts formal Church teaching. But like I said, forget the book. Either way, the Church does teach that homosexual orientation is not a choice.

 

[Debora123]

“Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.” CCC

Right, meaning no one knows what causes it. I never claimed to know what causes it, in fact the quote I posted says exactly that. We DO however, know that whatever the cause, it is NOT something that is chosen.

Would you like me to post CAF’s explanation again?