The Virtue of Homosexuality

[BeaStKid]

Most Many of us gays are so obsessed with seeing only the negative side of being gay, that the very thought of there possibly being a positive side to being gay hardly strikes us. I am one of those who strongly believes that that being gay can not just be a positive challenge but also a blessing.

 

Again, a piece by John Corvino which first appeared February 7, 2003, in Michigan's Between the Lines.

 

Homosexuality and Morality, Part 6: The Virtue of Homosexuality

http://www.indegayforum.org/news/show/26724.html

 

I HAVE SPENT my last five columns

[Menzoberranzen]

Most of us gays are so obsessed with seeing only the negative side of being gay, that the very thought of there possibly being a positive side to being gay hardly strikes us.

 

'Most' seems a bit extreme to me.

[AFriendlyFace]

'Most' seems a bit extreme to me.

Yes, I would agree with that.

 

Interesting article, but apart from the last section about egalitarian relationships - the aspect of homosexuality which has always most appealed to me - I didn't think the majority of the arguments were particularly compelling. Probably, because as the author points out, they're the same benefits which straight people could reap. I was rather hoping for an article about the virtue intrinsic exclusively in homosexual relationships.

 

Thanks for sharing though, good read

-Kevin

[BeaStKid]

I hope it is O.K now.....

[Benji]

I hope it is O.K now.....

 

 

.........Yeah, your ok!

[BeaStKid]

.........Yeah, your ok!

[rknapp]

"Doubling your wardrobe." My pant size is 36" (well, 35... but I can't find 35 anywhere), what am I supposed to do if my boyfriend is a size 30? Or if all of his pants are jeans?

[Menzoberranzen]

I hope it is O.K now.....

 

Not really. I still disagree with the statement.

 

About the article, it is more a list of virtues that apply to any relationship without a 'dominant' partner. Any relationship involving a feminist or liberal-thinking man could have exactly the same benefits as the ones listed in the article. His introductory paragraph is a load of BS anyway; a relationship is not, in and of itself, morally 'beneficial' to anybody. It may be psychologically/socially beneficial, but is a street that is occupied by homosexual couples somehow more moral than one occupied by heterosexual ones? Then he goes off on some tangent about pleasure and celibacy that are not in anyway unique to gay people.

 

I also don't like how he finishes the article with some grandiose wording about egalitarianism. Umm, being gay doesn't 'force you to think for yourself.' If that were the case, then we wouldn't have teenagers slitting their wrists because they think they are sinners.

 

Menzo

[Benji]

"Doubling your wardrobe." My pant size is 36" (well, 35... but I can't find 35 anywhere), what am I supposed to do if my boyfriend is a size 30? Or if all of his pants are jeans?

 

 

:wacko: ......Huh!!

[AFriendlyFace]

Not really. I still disagree with the statement.

 

About the article, it is more a list of virtues that apply to any relationship without a 'dominant' partner. Any relationship involving a feminist or liberal-thinking man could have exactly the same benefits as the ones listed in the article. His introductory paragraph is a load of BS anyway; a relationship is not, in and of itself, morally 'beneficial' to anybody. It may be psychologically/socially beneficial, but is a street that is occupied by homosexual couples somehow more moral than one occupied by heterosexual ones? Then he goes off on some tangent about pleasure and celibacy that are not in anyway unique to gay people.

 

I also don't like how he finishes the article with some grandiose wording about egalitarianism. Umm, being gay doesn't 'force you to think for yourself.' If that were the case, then we wouldn't have teenagers slitting their wrists because they think they are sinners.

 

Menzo

Well said, Menzo!

 

***Strolls back to the kitchen to resume mincing his own words***

 

"Doubling your wardrobe." My pant size is 36" (well, 35... but I can't find 35 anywhere), what am I supposed to do if my boyfriend is a size 30? Or if all of his pants are jeans?

LOL, you know the doubling your wardrobe thing has always been one of the most appealing parts to me as well! ...well I suppose the emotional connection, security, trust, and physical affection are okay too...but doubling your wardrobe! I mean come on!

 

LOL, anyway, you could try to find a boyfriend about your size. And seriously, I'm not just talking about the clothes thing, I really think that ideally my boyfriend would be about the same size as me, just 'cause we'd "fit better" together. I even admit to usually being less attracted to very tall people. I don't mind as much when people are smaller than me, but I think it would take some serious getting used to for me to date someone more than 2 or 3 inches taller than me.

 

Anyway, getting back to the wardrobe thing, with stuff like shirts, and belts it would likely still work to swap. They might be a bit large on the smaller partner, or a little snug on the bigger partner, but generally I think it's usually doable unless there's a big size difference.

 

-Kevin

Edited September 22, 2007 by AFriendlyFace

[rknapp]

Kevin you're a stick, you'll have no trouble doubling your wardrobe. It sounds to me like I would suddenly find that my wardrobe is collapsing in on itself if my smaller boyfriend decided he liked my clothes lol. I'm not into playing the Hulk, thank you very much!