Str8/BI to Gay: if reverse conversion were possible,would it be right?

[W_L]

Been a while since I created a topic and not since the site got converted to its new format, so I thought why not ask a question that almost every gay kid has thought about, since they first had a crush on that perfect guy (who just so happens to have a girlfriend ).

 

I think a while back in the old Q&A forum we had a question about "How you would turn a straight guy gay?", most people, including me, thought that was kind of impossible and probably a troll. However, after reading stories for so many years on here and other sites, I just recently had an interesting epiphany on the issue. The process is not what is important, but the reasoning behind should we do it and why we would do it?

 

While, the idea is not possible right now in most circumstances, "what if" it was a counter to push a bi-curious straight or female leaning bisexual guy over to the other side of the Kinsey spectrum. The clearer question then is it right to do so?

 

The argument against Ex-gay and Christian conversion therapy has been about how unrealistic and improbable such methods are to remove homosexuality from people's basic instincts. Though, you can suppress your sexuality, it does not remove it.

 

In gay fiction, it is not removal, but an addition to a personality that overrides their current social situations. However, it is assumed that once you are hit with it, you lose the traces of heterosexual norms. Some gay authors have written about it like flipping a switch, but they never question whether it was right or wrong to do it in the first place, because it was just a "perfect change" to what readers want.

 

I hate to say this, but there is something quite scary about this duality: in reality, gay guys are victims of these grotesque treatments, but in some of our fiction, we are aspiring to become like them ourselves without even noticing it.

 

I realized that there was a parallelism within real world idealized conversion from Gay to Straight and gay fiction's perfect conversions from straight to gay.

 

 

Edited March 5, 2014 by W_L

[Zombie]

There's an important difference. The gay to straight "therapy" is an organised belief system involving group pressure against a targeted individual to achieve the group's objective of making everyone they have power over fall into line with their very narrow belief of what is "normal". In reality this often means young people who are not yet independent and are therefore especially vulnerable

 

The gay trope is just, er, one-on-one lurrrve
 

[Celethiel]

There's an important difference. The gay to straight "therapy" is an organised belief system involving group pressure against a targeted individual to achieve the group's objective of making everyone they have power over fall into line with their very narrow belief of what is "normal". In reality this often means young people who are not yet independent and are therefore especially vulnerable

 

The gay trope is just, er, one-on-one lurrrve

 

oh you mean like what the law system was during the Pilgrim era of the United States

[Ashi]

Those stories are fictions....  And usually in the beginning of the story it would say it's a work of fiction/fantasy.  In reality, if a gay guy tries to convert a straight guy, it'll be immoral.  

 

That said, the story I am currently working on has that type of issue, except my MC doesn't want his straight friend to like him....  I am trying to make the story as realistic as possible....

 

That said, everyone knows blondes have more fun.  And straight guys probably think gay guys have more fun, and gay guys would fantasize being normal, too.  But you know the reality better.

[rustle]

Is it moral? Hells no. Interference with the life of any living creature is morally tinged. When I put a collar on my dog, there are moral ramifications.

 

You're not speaking of persuasion or enticement here, but of outright change. That implies, at best, ambivalence toward another's nature. Talk about fraught...

[hh5]

oh this is where BDSM with the holodeck safeties off and is a valid conversion method compared to the gay to straight methods

plus toss the person into daily orgies

 

all activities viewable on paid website and site displaying message "This is real no actors recruited"

 

I guess this is used to return the gay # back up when too many converted the other way

[W_L]

Interesting, I've elicited a negative vote

 

It's a legitimate question about morality and ethics. It's easy to write a gay fiction story, where you turn straight guys guy just so you have a perfect world made according to rules that give you safety and comfort. On the other side of the spectrum, anti-gay advocates believe that using extreme psychological and physiological "treatments", you can create a "perfect" world, where they feel safe and comfortable.

 

Among gay writers, few people ask these tough questions about how different we are from our opponents and how easy we can turn into them if given the wrong incentives.

 

By the way Ashi, one of the reasons I like writing realism in stories, even in my sci-fi fantasy stories, is that I want readers to deal with their issues, not escape into an ideal (that is what a lot of folks do when reading fiction) and continue a cycle of denial in a perfect "gay oriented fiction story" where villains are one dimensional preachers and gay people are victims that can rise above all odds to find love and comfort. However, my warning to you is that few people like to read those kinds of stories; they'd rather enjoy a safe story with easy to understand characters, no ambiguity, and stock villains from the evil girlfriend to the sadistic preacher.

[Ashi]

By the way Ashi, one of the reasons I like writing realism in stories, even in my sci-fi fantasy stories, is that I want readers to deal with their issues, not escape into an ideal (that is what a lot of folks do when reading fiction) and continue a cycle of denial in a perfect "gay oriented fiction story" where villains are one dimensional preachers and gay people are victims that can rise above all odds to find love and comfort. However, my warning to you is that few people like to read those kinds of stories; they'd rather enjoy a safe story with easy to understand characters, no ambiguity, and stock villains from the evil girlfriend to the sadistic preacher.

 

I hope I don't sound like I am passing judgment.  In any case, I also prefer realism in my stories, whether it's something I read or write.  But there is a market for any type of story.  I played The Sims, and I noticed one phenomenon among players.  There are a lot of people prefer those supernatural/fantasy type of expansion packs and I don't play those if I could avoid them.  The point is, even with a game like that, there are different types of audiences.  I don't imagine majority of people who read supermarket romance actually would replicate what they read in real life, but what do I know.  And here is a very easy to understand (though crude) analogy:  I don't marry the guy whose image I use to jerk off at night. 

 

Human psychology is complex.  I don't think projecting our own desire would work very well on people whose mind is very different from our own type.  Let them do what they like and we do our own things, unless someone is harmed.  If that's the case, it's police matter, not ours.  Much of my social studied done in school gave me such conclusion.  We can only responsible and control our own lives.  What you think is better for others sometimes may actually have unexpected results.

 

Anyways, I am not sure what's that last warning is for.  It almost sounds like you believe I think those stories are evil.  I only believe it's not good if people actually try to live in their fantasy.  Most of my words are very ambiguous and very difficult to understand to some (am I being too zen?).  I think that might be the source of much misunderstanding.  I wish you well.  If this applies to you: sometimes the life can feel a bit confusing, if so accept it, rather than trying to make a sense out of it and get frustrated.  Have you watched Oxford Murders?  I think you'd enjoy it.

[W_L]

Nah ashi, zen is easy to get if you read a little buddhist commentary

 

A chinese philosopher in the 17th century claimed," it is hard to live with truth. "

 

He believed that knowlwdge is limited, so evil is done by partial understanding. We are bound by limited understanding.

 

One must always seek new truth

[Celethiel]

here is the question then, if the opposing was true, would it be any more ethical...

it is like saying if you had the power to control one's mind would you do it, and would it be ethical to do so...

or as the case may be if you could use mass media to cause a minority group to seperate from their country should you, and is it ethical...

the answer really is no to all of these, it isn't ethical and you shouldn't do it... however it doesn't mean that if one had the power to do these things they would not do it, and in some cases, just because they could....

power makes people do things that they "shouldn't do..."

Fear makes people do things they "shouldn't do"...

heck Love makes people do things they "shouldn't do"...

really it would depend on someone's morals and what the exceptions to those morals are whether it's something they would do in a given situation or not... and really there are times Personal Morals be damned they'll do it anyway because they think they HAVE to.

Really Human morality is a very fluid thing and varies quite a bit from culture to culture and time period to time period....

Personal morality similarly is very fluid and varies from instance to instance because humans are thinking beings, and nothing is truly set in stone.... after all a person says he'll never hurt an animal would change their mind very quickly if they were starving....

The world isn't black and white and to beleave it is, is a childs perspective...

Which is one reason laws have variety to them...

Someone might say they will never do something, but you better pray that you would never be put into the position where you were forced to choose whether or not to do it.... especially if not to do it meant death.

[hh5]

Preachers, not all are bad, not all are good, some are driven by human frailties (hunger for power, money, pride, yeah the seven sins at least)

Some are radical, some are good people. Some have a degree in theology. Some don't and have their own theology school.

Some follow a tradition, some follow ritual, some follow what is happening in theology of today.

 

Some want changes in field and some are don't.

 

Perhaps its the matter of what they preach. My NYC\NJ preacher, always preaches about money and the collection plate. Perhaps some ppl are turned off by his loud preaching and perhaps some are awaken. The bottomline the awaken gives their 1%, 5%, 10% or 20%. 

 

It probably make sense to visit as many churches as possible and really get a sense of how they operate and think as a whole.

My mothers neighbor goes to the catholic church. Sometimes when we talk I learn something new in religion and perhaps that is better theology in her church than others. lol, it sounds like some people in the congregations are choosy of what church they go to and some aren't.

 

They all argue in theology much like all engineers, scientist, financial, and politicians argue in their fields. Its because their all human. No one has the time nor the interest to hear the other argument because it would change their own arguments of what they believe is true. 

 

Both sides (gay, straight) are equally addressing their numbers. Its a matter how each side addresses the anti-gay or pro-gay issue.

 

The question "would it be right?" ... that be in the eye of the beholder ... wouldn't?

If no one interfered with the natural S.O choice then that would be right but if society forces a choice of either way then that is surely interference and thats where its not right. When society forces the choice or argues its path of choice, it creates confusion, which is the right way by me or by society?

 

When people preach or argue like union leaders. Isn't that the place where it isn't right?

I know you seen the two or three Sean Penn movies. Both illustrate where things went (the shakespeare ending). Somewhere a fight or drama is made and it leads to a negative ending for the main character rather than enlightenment for all where no one dies.

 

Yeah shakespeare says it perfectly "To thine own self be true" but I wonder whats shakespeare stance on the gay issue?

 

The question is how many good people have you encountered in your life that remain good?

Can you say its the matter of where the wind blows?

 

Are you going to write based on dark fiction since that is format of choice these days?

How is dark fiction realistic?

It seems it has the same issues as the perfect world fiction.

 

Perhaps the best part of the writing is when ppl can understand the issues at hand and make positive choices in their future.

The win-win choice is the best than the win-loose where everyone loses.

 

I like that evil british captain in the pirates movie that came to the epiphany of "its not good business" but pity it became his epitab. Yeah, the fight was win-lose like in chess but how is that good business. Perhaps the best outcome in chess is stalemate but we're all sold on Winner outcome.

 

Interesting, I've elicited a negative vote

 

..... where villains are one dimensional preachers and gay people are victims that can rise above all odds to find love and comfort. However, my warning to you is that few people like to read those kinds of stories; they'd rather enjoy a safe story with easy to understand characters, no ambiguity, and stock villains from the evil girlfriend to the sadistic preacher.

Edited March 11, 2014 by hh5