Somebody define normal?
I was having a discussion on Gays and Lesbians with my fellow students in English, and the person kept saying thats its just not normal, i asked him whats normal? He couldnt answer me without getting into religion. Can someone answer that without doing the same thing?

Normal is a subjective quality that is a combination of what's morally acceptable and preferred among the majority of the populous.

In other words, an idealized farce.

Lol
When i think of normal i think of Average, but then that goes even further into that there really is no such thing as normal or average

Normal is what the media says it should be. As such, the normal girl is a sluttily-dressed size 0 that remains an extremely provocative virgin until marriage and the normal man is a muscular tough guy that wears a suit 9-5 during the week.

What was normal 50 years ago certainly isn't normal today. Even 40... 30.. 20 years ago.

Normal is a social standard. And "normal" evolves with humanity.

As far as gays and lesbians go... I fully support their lifestyle. The world is facing an overpopulation problem right now, and what was "normal" during our evolution to ensure our survival, is now becoming a problem.

When a homosexual wants a kid, they're generally likely to adopt, and I personally think thats a great thing. Less orphans, less breeding... Good thing.

Sorry i wasnt trying to make this a discussion about gay/lesbian marrages but jus trying to show where i got the idea from.

Huh?

I think he's making a joke about the name looking like "normal".

Something's normal if 50% or more of the people do it... And we, sir are not normal at all! :P [/joke]

Actually, there's no more real definition of normal anymore, rare cases are becoming more. But what people view as normal is what the TV says it is. I can't believe how much people are seduced by what they say on TV.

Extreme Coder

Ok well lets go back to what i was saying before,about the person saying that it isnt normal? if there is no such thing then why compare it to something?

Normalcy is an easy cover for bigotry.

In America, the WASP is "normal."

I think the term "normal" is almost always a subjective term and different to everyone else; take the differences in musical taste for example - the only one that really seems "normal" to some people is the one that they like. But i guess the word "normal" could be a democraticly chosen definition of what's right, but then a lot of people say morality is just expression of emotion... so i guess NOTHING is normal, it's a made-up word that means nothing in the physical world like abstract ideas in physics like impulse and buoyancy force, they might seem to be apparent and real but logically they are just a human expression of a couple of different things put together.

Wow, big question! Normal is a reaction to what is socially acceptable in a given period of time shaped by the given culture. But is socially accepted behavior good because it is what is "normal". social groups on the other side of "normal" would argue(if they live to argue) it is not. What is the opposite of normal=freak, but being a freak is becoming normal it seems. I would guess some equate normal out to a persons morals. I could ramble on but I believe truly like what has already been said it is subjective and particular to a society.
or more simply said:

Rarely do i say much on forums that isn't mindless twittering and rambling, but I think the idea of "normality" as a human construct like the abstract notions of impulse etc that exist for our understanding but not actually in the physical universe in any way is a good 'un

It's also the self-proclaimed "normal" demographic's safety net to make themselves feel better about being brainwashed into buying into what the corporate agenda wants them to.

In defining normal with regards to gays and marriage, I tend to rely on biology. Statistically, most humans choose to reproduce with a member of the opposite sex, since that's how our bodies work. It's the only pairing of humans that can produce children without lab work. Marriage historically has been a legal or religious recognition of a (potentially-)child-bearing pair-bond between two people, namely a man and a woman.

That's what I would define as "normal." (And I use this word carefully.) For the record, I have no problem with gays getting married, although it creeps the hell out of me. I understand that my personal feelings shouldn't infringe upon another's rights.

Vkkim hit on a point that I think a lot of people forget about. The ultimate purpose of two genders within a species is reproduction.

While I fully support the right of homosexual partners to live together, marry, etc., they are not "normal" in the biological sense, in that there is no possible way for two men or two women to produce a child by themselves.

That would be the only way i could think of defining "normal" when it comes to homosexuality etc, but it doesn't make it "wrong" or disgusting. But then who's to say it is unnatural? Obviously homosexuality has been around for longer than just a few years so maybe it's just a natural and recognised part of humanity that isn't immediately obvious.

Agreed. Although some people find it disgusting, that doesn't make it inherently "wrong" or unnatural. I guess what I should have said is that homosexuality is not normal in the reproductive sense.