/lit/ - Literature

>>19521950
>It’s not.
>it wasn’t in any way.
So do you disagree with Pausanias when he says that:
"In Ionia and in many other places (wherever they live under barbarians) it has customarily been held to be shameful. In the eyes of the barbarians, on account of their tyrannies, pederasty as well as philosophy and the love of gymnastics is shameful; for I suspect that it is not to the advantage of the rulers that great and proud thoughts be engendered among their subjects" (Symposium, 182c)
Or Aristophanes when he said:
"...all who are [slices of the original male] pursue the males; and while they are boys—because they are cutlets of the male—they are friendly to men and enjoying lying down together with and embracing men; and these are the best of boys and lads, because they are naturally the manliest. Some, to be sure, assert that such boys are shameless, but they lie. For it is not out of shamelessness that they do this but out of boldness, manliness, and masculinity, feeling great affection for what is like to themselves." (Symposium, 192a)
>If everyone did it would it make humanity better or worse?
>If everyone was gay humanity would end. It literally fails upon initial inspection due to this fact.
If everyone was a celibate priest humanity would end. Does that make the priesthood immoral? No.
>If you want more than that I would suggest looking into associated mental illness rates, child abuse rates, health impacts, and child raising outcomes for homosexuals compared to heteros.
I have looked into these things and the vast majority of studies show that children raised by homosexual couples fair just as well as those raised by heterosexual couples. Unless there is some reason you want me to ignore those ones? Those ones are wrong. Only the ones that agree with you are right, because your beliefs are correct, a priori.
>Despite making up a small percentage of the population homosexuals account for nearly 40% of child abuse cases in the USA.
This is misleading since it implies men who fuck other men are the same demographic molesting male children, when the two populations don't actually have that much overlap. see pic related

Here is a question, would the human race be better off without homosexuals? Would it be better off without Sappho, Sophocles, Socrates, Caravaggio, Donatello, Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Whitman, Turing, etc?
>>19521957
You said "animals do not engage in gay sex" which I disproved, not "the concept of sexual orientation can't easily be applied to most animals" which I never even disagreed with. But there are animals where a significant portion of males do seem to have exclusive homosexual inclinations, such as male rams and black swans. And offspring raised by male-male black swan couples fare better and survive longer than those raised by male-female ones.