
Originally Posted by
PrettyCool_Dude
Wow! Dami kong natututunan dito a. Nagresearch lang ako with regards to my daughter's homosexual tendency and I'm being opened up to a whole new different kind of world. Haha! At talagang may nag-aaway pa yata ha.
I just don't understand each one's perception of 'homosexuality'. Siguro iyon ang dahilan kung bakit hindi kayo nagkakaintindihan. Isn't it just referring to the sexual practice and not the behavior in general? Kasi ako, marami akong kilalang mga effeminate pero hindi sila mga bakla. At mayroon din akong mga kilalang machong-macho pero mga paminta pala. So, para ma settle ko sa sarili ko ang confusion regarding the definition of homosexuality, I simply confined it to the sexual practice. Therefore, hindi ko masasabing bakla kapag hindi naman pumapatol sa kapwa lalaki, or tomboy kapag hindi naman pumapatol sa kapwa babae, regardless kung effeminate or masculine ang style. Pag pumapatol naman on both gender, bisexual iyon, tama ba ako? Well, that's just my own arrangement ha.
Kay TS naman, with this definition of mine therefore, hindi ko sya maituring na bakla. May identity crisis sya, oo, but it's a natural process on everyone's life. Pwedeng masettle nya iyon early in life, or tumagal iyon for a lifetime. In TS's case for example, medyo complicated ang identity crisis nya kasi may disconcordance ang kanyang sexual identity from his sexual preference, but that doesn't say he's homosexual, until he choses to be one. Palagay ko, hindi maiintindihan ng iba diyan ang ganitong notion.
Therefore, with that arranged definition of my own, masasabi kong masama ang maging bakla - but take note that that refers only to those that does the sexual practice, as I don't consider bakla those that only practices hetero-sex, whether they're effeminate or not. Pero linawin ko lang, ayaw kong husgahan ang lahat ng mga bakla. Case-to-case basis pa rin siguro yun. Only God has the right to judge them.