Everyone,
It may help to remember that Acinteyyo's mother tongue is not English despite how well he writes.
i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
- Khalil Bodhi
- Posts: 2250
- Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:32 pm
- Location: NYC
- Contact:
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
To avoid all evil, to cultivate good, and to cleanse one's mind — this is the teaching of the Buddhas.
-Dhp. 183
The Stoic Buddhist: https://www.quora.com/q/dwxmcndlgmobmeu ... pOR2p0uAdH
My Practice Blog:
http://khalilbodhi.wordpress.com
-Dhp. 183
The Stoic Buddhist: https://www.quora.com/q/dwxmcndlgmobmeu ... pOR2p0uAdH
My Practice Blog:
http://khalilbodhi.wordpress.com
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
Thanks, for the compliment and the reminderKhalil Bodhi wrote:Everyone,
It may help to remember that Acinteyyo's mother tongue is not English despite how well he writes.
tiltbillings wrote:Seriously? Despite the negative connotations of the word deviant is freighted with, you seriously think it is appropriate, correct?acinteyyo wrote:I think to use the term "deviant" is correct.
I've checked different dictionaries and realized that there really is a negative connotation to the word "deviant" that I did not know of. So I understand your reactions. I'm not going to argue whether or not bonobos are a valid comparison to humans.clw_uk wrote:Acinteyyo -
It's a normal variation of sexuality, which occurs in a minority of people. The word "deviant" implies that it's a behaviour which strays from accepted norms. This is the basis of the "it's not natural, it's a choice" argument which, as demonstrated by my reference to the bonobos, is a fallacy.
What I'm trying to say is quite similar to what clw_uk said. It's a normal variation of sexuality, which occurs in a minority. Maybe "variant" is a better word?
Anyhow, homosexuality is not normal given the fact that it occurs only in a minority of people. It appears to me, that homosexuality sometimes is represented as being normal in such a way, as if it occured in a relatively normal ratio compared to the majority of people being heterosexual and as if it wouldn't be anything special at all. However that is simply not quite how it appears in reality. I'm not talking about acceptance or condemnation of any kind but about the simple figures displaying the average occurances.
Homosexuality is a "deviation from the norm" and this meaning, without any negative connotations, is what I've had in mind when I've said, that I think it is correct to use the term "deviant". I now acknowledge the implications that are caused by that word. So I'll try to be more cautious.
I don't have gay friends but I've made acquaintances with gays and of course I also don't see them as "abnormal deviants", with all the negative connotations implied, but I also don't ingore the fact, that their sexual orientation is a deviation from the norm, and that their behaviour is the behaviour of a minority. I also want to emphasize that simple "abnormal behaviour" does not make an "abnormal human".Aloka wrote:Sorry but I just don't see my gay friends as abnormal deviants.acinteyyo wrote: it is far from being normal and I think it's simply incorrect to try to represent it like so.
You are failing to see how homosexuality is a deviant behaviour
What I really fail to see is why people seem to be very emotional when it comes to homosexuality. If it really was nothing special, then there wouldn't be all the hassle about it. That's why I usually prefer to keep my mouth shut, because a simple sexual preference really isn't worth the trouble.
I hope I could clarify my statement.
best wishes, acinteyyo
Thag 1.20. Ajita - I do not fear death; nor do I long for life. I’ll lay down this body, aware and mindful.
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
It is a normal variation that is found among a minority of human beings.acinteyyo wrote: Anyhow, homosexuality is not normal given the fact that it occurs only in a minority of people.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
I tried to convey the same idea before and I got hated for it, not on this forum thoughacinteyyo wrote:What I really fail to see is why people seem to be very emotional when it comes to homosexuality. If it really was nothing special, then there wouldn't be all the hassle about it. That's why I usually prefer to keep my mouth shut, because a simple sexual preference really isn't worth the trouble.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
Many people have gone through years of hard work and struggle to get people to merely acknowledge it as an actual way to be. And now that it is truly 'out' there, well on its way to being accepted for the most part, it is a very sensitive time. Emotions are high but will settle in the years to come.acinteyyo wrote:What I really fail to see is why people seem to be very emotional when it comes to homosexuality. If it really was nothing special, then there wouldn't be all the hassle about it.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
Yes it is. Like green eyes for example which is also a normal variation among human beings. Yet only 2 - 4% of the worlds population have green eyes, round about 90% have brown eyes, which therefore is to be seen as the norm, whereas green eyes being a perfectly normal variation is only found in a minority of human beings, thus not the norm.tiltbillings wrote:It is a normal variation that is found among a minority of human beings.acinteyyo wrote: Anyhow, homosexuality is not normal given the fact that it occurs only in a minority of people.
I guess I have nothing more to add to this conversation.
best wishes, acinteyyo
Thag 1.20. Ajita - I do not fear death; nor do I long for life. I’ll lay down this body, aware and mindful.
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:The word "eunuch" is just the translation of the Pāli word "Pandaka." The Sayādaw's article was written many years ago. All sexual deviants: homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, and eunuchs are included under the term Pandaka. See The Buddhist Monastic Code for details.Modus.Ponens wrote:How many eunuchs are in the western democracies? People in the west never committed this kind of bad karma that supposedly leads to be born as an eunuch?
Wouldn't that mean that gay mean are prohibited from ordaining?
As I previously mentioned I am gay. I have considered ordaining many times, and I hopefully will in the future. If pandaka means homosexual, does that mean I shouldn't go forth?
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
-
- Posts: 10262
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
Yes, it's been a long struggle and there is still a long way to go in some countries.SDC wrote:Many people have gone through years of hard work and struggle to get people to merely acknowledge it as an actual way to be. And now that it is truly 'out' there, well on its way to being accepted for the most part, it is a very sensitive time. Emotions are high but will settle in the years to come.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
- dhammacoustic
- Posts: 955
- Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2014 4:30 am
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
I don't think sexual orientation would matter, once you're ordainedclw_uk wrote:As I previously mentioned I am gay. I have considered ordaining many times, and I hopefully will in the future. If pandaka means homosexual, does that mean I shouldn't go forth?
http://www.chiangmai-chiangrai.com/beco ... iland.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;For the ordained monk, there are four cardinal rules which, if broken, result in his expulsion from the monkhood. These are:
Engaging in sexual relations,
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
If you are refering to the topics where you expressed your views on homosexuality & gay marriage at my website, Mohammed, here's one of them, and I don't see anyone expressing hatred towards you.Bundokji wrote:I tried to convey the same idea before and I got hated for it, not on this forum thoughacinteyyo wrote:What I really fail to see is why people seem to be very emotional when it comes to homosexuality. If it really was nothing special, then there wouldn't be all the hassle about it. That's why I usually prefer to keep my mouth shut, because a simple sexual preference really isn't worth the trouble.
http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries.co ... t=Bundokji
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
Hi clw_ukclw_uk wrote:Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:The word "eunuch" is just the translation of the Pāli word "Pandaka." The Sayādaw's article was written many years ago. All sexual deviants: homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, and eunuchs are included under the term Pandaka. See The Buddhist Monastic Code for details.Modus.Ponens wrote:How many eunuchs are in the western democracies? People in the west never committed this kind of bad karma that supposedly leads to be born as an eunuch?
Wouldn't that mean that gay mean are prohibited from ordaining?
As I previously mentioned I am gay. I have considered ordaining many times, and I hopefully will in the future. If pandaka means homosexual, does that mean I shouldn't go forth?
I'm not sure if you were hoping for a direct response from Bhikkhu Pesala but Bhante Sujato addresses the question in a comment on his blog -
"Deserves a full post, but briefly, there is no question that ordaining people of diverse sexualities is fine under the Vinaya. It is also fine to ordain trans people. Monks who say otherwise are basing themselves on traditional prejudice, not on the Vinaya."
https://sujato.wordpress.com/2015/06/15 ... editation/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
He also proposes a theory that pandika was originally "defined not by orientation or physical marks, but by unbridled and toxic sex addiction.".
Hopefully I have not misunderstood or misrepresented Bhante Sujato's view by giving it a new context here.
- Bhikkhu Pesala
- Posts: 4647
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
No it doesn't mean that. There are five kinds of pandaka. As I said, see the Buddhist Monastic Code for details. If you're contemplating ordination I recommend reading it carefully.clw_uk wrote:Wouldn't that mean that gay mean are prohibited from ordaining?
Blog • Pāli Fonts • In This Very Life • Buddhist Chronicles • Software (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
Acinteyyo -
The problem is that normal is relative. If we look at the bonobo species, it isn't normal to not engage in homosexual activity
I assume your not a homosexual, so you probably don't understand what it feels like to be called a "deviant" or 'not normal".
Although I have been lucky, in the sense of being accepted by my family and friends, I still have to occasionally hear hate filled speech from adherents of certain faiths (mostly Abrahamic) who consider me evil, dangerous, a freak and even in some cases consider me worthy of death.
The usual argument these people use is that homosexuality is "against nature" or it's a deviant sexual activity that we choose to engage it, or some other claptrap.
So you see, although I'm sure you don't mean to cause offence, calling a gay man or woman a "deviant" or "not normal" won't be taken very well and it will usually illicit an emotional response; because homosexuals have had to put up with being stigmatised as outcasts for centuries and the usual justification for this persecution is that we are abnormal.
As i said, I have been lucky but I know a lot of lgbt people who aren't so lucky. Even today homosexuals are being murdered in counties such as Iran, because they are viewed as being "deviants"
Anyhow, homosexuality is not normal given the fact that it occurs only in a minority of people. It appears to me, that homosexuality sometimes is represented as being normal in such a way, as if it occured in a relatively normal ratio compared to the majority of people being heterosexual and as if it wouldn't be anything special at all. However that is simply not quite how it appears in reality. I'm not talking about acceptance or condemnation of any kind but about the simple figures displaying the average occurances.
Homosexuality is a "deviation from the norm" and this meaning, without any negative connotations, is what I've had in mind when I've said, that I think it is correct to use the term "deviant". I now acknowledge the implications that are caused by that word. So I'll try to be more cautious.
The problem is that normal is relative. If we look at the bonobo species, it isn't normal to not engage in homosexual activity
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... mal_2.html;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;The bonobo, an African ape closely related to humans, has an even bigger sexual appetite. Studies suggest 75 percent of bonobo sex is nonreproductive and that nearly all bonobos are bisexual. Frans de Waal, author of Bonobo: The Forgotten Ape, calls the species a "make love, not war" primate. He believes bonobos use sex to resolve conflicts between individuals.
I assume your not a homosexual, so you probably don't understand what it feels like to be called a "deviant" or 'not normal".
Although I have been lucky, in the sense of being accepted by my family and friends, I still have to occasionally hear hate filled speech from adherents of certain faiths (mostly Abrahamic) who consider me evil, dangerous, a freak and even in some cases consider me worthy of death.
The usual argument these people use is that homosexuality is "against nature" or it's a deviant sexual activity that we choose to engage it, or some other claptrap.
So you see, although I'm sure you don't mean to cause offence, calling a gay man or woman a "deviant" or "not normal" won't be taken very well and it will usually illicit an emotional response; because homosexuals have had to put up with being stigmatised as outcasts for centuries and the usual justification for this persecution is that we are abnormal.
As i said, I have been lucky but I know a lot of lgbt people who aren't so lucky. Even today homosexuals are being murdered in counties such as Iran, because they are viewed as being "deviants"
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
Obviously there are different types of "like". I can't remember that liking people every has been considered "bad" by anyone I met.wolf1 wrote:forum mebers,
i am a woman but i like women. is it really bad?
Inspiration is based on the exchange of different linguistic expressions. But inspiration is best knowing how language relates to truth.
- Modus.Ponens
- Posts: 3854
- Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
- Location: Gallifrey
Re: i am a woman but i like women - is it really bad?
Hello, clw_uk.
I hope I'm not misrepresenting Bhante Dhammanando's position, but he once clarified this pandaka term as not necessarily meaning homosexual, but as meaning someone too controled by their own sexual urges.
A homosexual who dresses in drag might be an example. Or a gay man that never had a stable relationship and "parties" every night at a gay club.
There is a specific separation between bhikkhus and bhikkhunis because sex is a very powerful force. It would be detrimental for the path if monks and nuns could have the exact same freedom of association as lay men and women, except for the sexual acts themselves. So, if a homosexual joined the sangha, but was sexualy unrestrained, it won't be good for him, nor the local community of monks.
There is nothing moraly wrong, or evil, with homosexuality. It's just less usual than heterosexuality. And these categories may overlap, even temporarily. The real reason for the existence of homophobia is understood if you read a bit about evolutionary psychology. But keep in mind that just because something exists because of evolution, it doesn't mean it is moraly correct.
Metta
I hope I'm not misrepresenting Bhante Dhammanando's position, but he once clarified this pandaka term as not necessarily meaning homosexual, but as meaning someone too controled by their own sexual urges.
A homosexual who dresses in drag might be an example. Or a gay man that never had a stable relationship and "parties" every night at a gay club.
There is a specific separation between bhikkhus and bhikkhunis because sex is a very powerful force. It would be detrimental for the path if monks and nuns could have the exact same freedom of association as lay men and women, except for the sexual acts themselves. So, if a homosexual joined the sangha, but was sexualy unrestrained, it won't be good for him, nor the local community of monks.
There is nothing moraly wrong, or evil, with homosexuality. It's just less usual than heterosexuality. And these categories may overlap, even temporarily. The real reason for the existence of homophobia is understood if you read a bit about evolutionary psychology. But keep in mind that just because something exists because of evolution, it doesn't mean it is moraly correct.
Metta
'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' - Jhana Sutta