I encountered someone saying, "I have no problems with a person's sexual orientation and choice, I have a problem with anyone being openly sexual or flaunting their sexuality in front of me regardless of their choice of orientation."

I am a card carrying atheist. I was raised in one of the worst fundamental christian extremist groups and now live in near isolation from abandoning it nearly 10 years ago. All sexuality was bottled in my life and surroundings. This is still my comfort zone. A part of me wants to hold on to a similar ethos as the person I mentioned above, but I feel like I'm not very confident it is the right inner philosophical balance either.

I'm partially disabled now, so this is almost completely hypothetical. I am honestly looking to grow in my understanding of personal space and inner morality as it relates to others. Someone enlighten me please. Where does this go, what does it mean to you?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Scrumpf_Dabogy@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think one issue here is that discomfort is subjective. Discomfort is valid and an important way to gauge how we treat people. But its important to understand why someone is uncomfortable.

For example, if someone is uncomfortable with me talking super loud in a small room, then the solution would probably not be to change my tone of voice or the topic I'm talking about. Its the volume thats bringing them discomfort.

If someone is uncomfortable with others kissing in public, we might argue that its reasonable not to kiss in public for their comfort.

But what's the real cause of discomfort with two men kissing? Is it the kissing or their very existence? If two people loving each other brings someone discomfort because this person just doesn't aprove of their lifestyle, what's the solution, then?

The comfort they are likely seeking is to never have to acknowledge that others are different from them. And they can only get that by limiting the freedom of those "others".

[–] Evergreen5970@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I should probably clarify that I’m thinking of people who are uncomfortable with PDA from any couple, people who would be equally unhappy with a man and a woman kissing as a man and a man. Not people who are okay with PDA from straight couples but not from gay people.

[–] Scrumpf_Dabogy@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I'm sorry if I explained it poorly. I tend to ramble.

If you are uncomfortable with all forms of PDA, thats valid. The source of your discomfort is the act. Not who's doing it. And it would be a reasonable discomfort to accomadate.

If your discomfort was because of who is doing the act, then thats just prejudice. If the only accommodation that would work to comfort someone is harmful to others, then they need to look inward for a solution.

The point I kind of forgot I was making halfway through is that, while discomfort is valid and should be accommodated in society, discomfort is very subjective. Not everyone can explain their own discomfort accurately, and those that can might lie about it instead. So we have to be careful and try to recognize the difference between, "Your behavior makes me uncomfortable," and , "Your existence makes me uncomfortable."