Without using religion as a foundation, how do we KNOW heterosexuality is supposedly the 'natural' way?

Question

How did we as a society come to believe and accept this? What changed so much from the days of the Romans and Greeks when homosexuality was a natural and common occurance? What caused our shift in morality?

ok...they may not be able to reproduce, but animals have displayed gay behavior in nature since the dawn of animals. So, if it wasn't "natural" then what caused the urge to display the gay behavior in the first place?

Answer 1

Yes Greece homosexuality was normal until the Hellenistic era, then reverence for the woman took over. In Rome, men had sex with other men, but only slaves, servants, and commoners were penetrated.

Life needs to go on. It cannot do this if there weren't heterosexuals. For life to continue, there is no reason why homosexuality is needed.

Answer 2

The introduction of christianity was the change, of course.
If homosexuality wasn't natural, heterosexuals matings wouldn't produce homosexuals.
Skipping over the homosexuality in other animals thing, which, like it or not, is well documented, there are plenty of social species in which only some members are even allowed to reproduce- and many of those species are mammals. Therefore it is natural for some members of a species not to reproduce, and it does have selective value for the species that some of its members don't reproduce. Not every member of a species has to reproduce for a species to survive, and it's not desireable for every member of a species to reproduce. I don't understand why that's such a sacred cow to some people. The important thing is the survival of the species, not that every member of the species reproduce.
The whole "its isn't natural" thing just perplexes me. What can a human do that isn't natural? If a man could walk on water like Jesus, that wouldn't be natural.
Everything humans do is natural. That doesn't mean that everything humans do is acceptable in a society.
The only objection that anyone can really raise against homosexuality is that it's "immoral" based on certain pronouncements by religions based on belief in supernatural beings. Well, supernatural beings, if they exist, aren't natural. Their name specifies it. So that isn't a valid basis on which to say "it isn't natural." The fact that humans do it is enough to indicate that it's natural. That humans continue to proliferate indicates that it's a good thing that some people don't want to reproduce. That nobody's injured by the normal everyday sex life of a homosexual, means that it should be accepted. That some people refuse to see that means that they have issues that should be theirs to deal with, not mine.

Answer 3

i think the only reason for us to be heterosexual is to reproduce and that's it. I think society be lives that it should be man and women because that's the only way we can reproduce. I think what has changed since then is people are more in to religion and the bible that man REWROTE states that homosexuality is a sin, and everyday there is more and more people reading and believing every word that the bible or their pastors say without looking things up for them selves. the shift in morality i also believes comes form the bible and the different teachings of the bible. and with that said I still don't believe there is a soul out there that lives exactly as the bible is written. People pick out things that the bible says that the want to live by, no one lives the life as the bible is written, so I think people should lay off the gay people cause no one is right according to the bible.

Answer 4

Interesting question. Depends I suppose on the definition of "natural". Inasmuch as it's one of the "characteristics of living things" to reproduce, one could make a case that the "natural" way would be the way that allows the completion of the biological imperative to reproduce, pass on the genes to the next generation and then die. Which, strictly in terms of sexual biology, would argue for the "naturalness" of heterosexuality.

But the important point is this - human beings evolved beyond such concepts when they stopped rutting in seasons and evolved the sensations of pleasure in sex. As far as I'm concerned, all bets with "nature" were off at that point, and sex became more than just a means to a "natural" end. There's evidence that some other species have reached that point too - I believe both pigs and dolphins have sex for pleasure. So by the time we had advanced, thinking civilizations like the Greeks and Romans, human beings were much more free and easy about sex.

At the risk of sounding accusatory, I'd say a lot of our regression on this issue can be lain at the door of the Christian Church (certainly in the Western World). Their doctrine of one kind of "correct and morally acceptable" sex - heterosexual sex within the context of marriage - coloured thousands of years of history. In the UK, we had Elizabeth and later, Victoria as imperial powers, to spread a certain breed of sexual puritanism throughout their respective empires, and of course, the US was "founded" by, among others, the Puritans - "A group of people so uptight even the Engligh kicked them out", to quote Roin Williams. So hatred of nonconformity, of anything other than this narrow Christian "ideal" was bred into the fabric of an allegedly Godfearing Western world, to a degree that has taken us quite a long time to begin to break down again. Here's to the fight for a braoder understanding of "normality"!

Answer 5

Simply put people believe that which deviates from the majority is somehow 'unatural'
an argument without religous foundation would be that procreation is the 'natural' way. However I would say that hetrosexual intercourse although it creates a child does not automatically become the best way to raise that child.
Taking a look at the animal kingdom there is much diversity in social structures and the ways that children and created and raised.
The problem lies in the human desire to have everything labled and this sick desire to beat down anything that doesn't conform to the majority.
'Normal' is a social concept in my eyes, it does not really exisit and is generally defined by that which is majority.
I would say what is natural is that which simple happens and cannot be changes, so homosexuality is natural.

Answer 6

I suppose you could argue that heterosexuality is more "natural" in the procreational sense: much of "evolution" circulates around reproduction being a species' primary motive.

But, for me, recently learning about the prostate glan's role in sex between two men, and its resemblance to the "g-spot", I cannot ignore that homosexuality does seem like a natural function.

Also, Romans & Greeks practiced binge eating and regurgitation in order to eat again

Answer 7

i think it is what the individual is attracted to you are either gay or straight you don't need the BIBLE to help you figure yourself out you either are or aren't i had my first crush on a female last summer and i have always considered myself straight until then i am married with kids so going down that road is not an option for me but i will always sit and wonder who/what i am so live life to the fullest and whatever you are comfortable with you know and all this what society thinks who cares they change their minds too often to create a stable well thought out opinion and i have yet to meet a greek or a roman so i can't answer that part of the question either well take care and HUGS

Answer 8

The terms... natural, normal, regular are all subjective terms.. They mean to the user what they want it to mean...

I believe that there is no "NATURAL" way.... just many different ways..

The true difference in any Sexual act is if offspring will happen... that is the only difference...

As for when did the shift in morality... I heard somewhere that it was in the 5th or 7th century.. a Pope decided that sex should be for Procreation only.

Answer 9

we as creatures are not unicellular. we breed through sex. if homosexuality is the natural way, then why wasn't the human race all men or all women. Homosexuals simply try to imitate the heterosexual relation. Gay men use anal sex to make up for the absence of a vagina. Lesbians use vibrators and oral sex to make up for the absence of a penis.

Sex is all about the need to receive from the other and discover them. Romans and Greeks believed in the inferiority of women. they felt women had nothing of value to give to them. that's one reason men went to each other for mental and physical nourishment. Secondly, women were secluded so men spent most of the time together.

The Greeks had sports activities and public baths that made them expose their bodies before each other. this alone could be a reason for homosexuality (after all we know men go to prison heterosexual and from the scarcity of women and the availability of men + the need to satisfy their desire, they have same sex relations)

finally, homosexuality is an act of narcissism. gays and lesbians are so obsessed with their love for themselves that even the object of their romantic feelings becomes a copy of themselves.

Answer 10

it is the "natural" way for procreation, at least in the time before science could do things to help the process along.
It is not the "natural" way, necessarily, as far as attraction and emotion are concerned.
natural does not always mean good though.
too much of anything natural can be bad for you...sunshine and tanning are natural, but too much can cause skin cancer.

Who was it that said "moderation in all things...."?


note: this is written by a gay person!

Answer 11

Well, if you look back, it all started when Constantine became emperor.
He was all like "Yeah, okay, so we're all gonna be christians now 'cause I'm the emperor and I said so."
He didn't enforce rules very much, it seems, but then his sons took over.
And they made it against the law to be gay.
These laws spread just as the already twisted teachings of christianity did, and, sadly, they were enforced. It was actually accepted throughout europe up until that point.
It's rather sad really.