Originally posted by Robtard
I KNEW IT! So, can you tell us what specifically happened to you, to make you like man-ass?
Well, I can only assume it had something to do with taking baths with my father as a child, and finding my aunt's old barbie dolls in my grandparent's basement.
(Ignore the fact that I also took baths with my mother and that I tortured the barbies and singed off all their hair)
I also recall hearing the word homosexual on television as a kid, on the news if I recall correctly.
(ignore the fact that I already knew what a heterosexual was)
Or, perhaps it was when I put on my mothers high heels and hats when I was playing in her bedroom.
(ignore the fact that I did the same with my father's clothes)
But, I've always subscribed to the idea that it was the moment I realized I had a crush on another guy and spent the next 15 years telling myself that if anyone found out, I'd be an outcast and mocked for feeling the way I did. (By the time I came out at 21, no one was suprised -my grandmother had figured it out when I was 9)
Originally posted by Devil King
Well, I can only assume it had something to do with taking baths with my father as a child, and finding my aunt's old barbie dolls in my grandparent's basement.(Ignore the fact that I also took baths with my mother and that I tortured the barbies and singed off all their hair)
I also recall hearing the word homosexual on television as a kid, on the news if I recall correctly.
(ignore the fact that I already knew what a heterosexual was)
Or, perhaps it was when I put on my mothers high heels and hats when I was playing in her bedroom.
(ignore the fact that I did the same with my father's clothes)
But, I've always subscribed to the idea that it was the moment I realized I had a crush on another guy and spent the next 15 years telling myself that if anyone found out, I'd be an outcast and mocked for feeling the way I did. (By the time I came out at 21, no one was suprised -my grandmother had figured it out when I was 9)
Similar boat...
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The two are not mutually exclusive; behaviors can be driven by biological factors without being coded in the human genome.
(I have done similar things as a poster...so I cannot make this statement without being innocent.)
How can you post something like that and not realize how wrong that statement is? Since both of us have clearly stated our positions, it serves no further purpose for us to continue to "uh huh, nuh uh, uh huh, nuh uh." Biological factors related to reproduction such as higher levels of testosterone (leading both males and females to have a higher labido) are obviously programmed into the genes. Almost everything about human biology is driven by or related to genetics.(Exceptions would be poisoning or other environmental factors that affects how the body functions..even then, what the person is given as far as genes go, could affect how the body can handle those environmental factors.)
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The penis is not designed.
We have been over this already: I am not intending "design" to indicate "intelligent design", I am using design to simply indicate the result of millions of years of natural selection. The penis IS designed for specific functions...so is the vagina. Your arguing my use of the word "designed" does not change that.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Yet, copulation does not always result in reproduction.
How does that address my point that "copulation" is incidental to my point that humans are programmed genetically to reproduce, sexually?
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Homosexuals respond to the pheromone production of members of the same sex; that is a fact. How do you explain this?
That is quite easy to explain since I believe that homosexuality can be genetic...didn't I make that clear? If I didn't, I apologize. Also, it should be possible to become conditioned to preferring specific pheromones. Do you think response to pheromones are indicative of sexual orientation?
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Yet, it is the urge to copulate, not reproduce, that causes people to copulate in the first place.
1. Some people copulate specifically to reproduce. (A conscious decision.)
2. Even if the copulating couple does not realize that copulation results in reproduction (not all of the time, of course) it does change the fact that humans are programmed via their genetics to reproduce via copulation. Those urges are reproductive urges, whether or not you chose to recognize that will not change that fact.
Those urges are not always be in alignment with reproductive purposes, i.e. a person is born homosexual. That, imo, is not normal as far as biology goes. If a genetic difference hinders a species ability to reproduce offspring to be adapted to its environment (from bad vision, bone diseases, to homosexuality) then it is a mal-adapted genetic difference, from a biological perspective. Do not mistake that for a sociological perspective; I do not consider homosexuals to be malfunctioning units of society.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Sexual orientation is something one discovers during adolescence through the process of maturing. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, same-sex sexual experimentation is both normal and common among heterosexual children and adolescents. Likewise, opposite-sex sexual experimentation is normal and common among homosexual children and adolescents.
That is not really explaining why he chose homosexuality. He was clearly a heterosexual male. By his choices, he decided on homosexuality. He wasn't born homosexual. Do you think he wanted a boner in gym class? This was my point. Not everyone who is homosexual are homosexual because they were born that way. (In other words, genetics.) Not everyone is homosexual who claim to be homosexual.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The article is fairly thorough; the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that sexual orientation is caused by genetic or biological factors. What needs to be expanded upon?
More on this later...I don't have time to post about it.
i thin the problem is that people are relating "preferance" to "choice" . if i like chocolate, it isnt necessary that i have a genetic disposition to liking it as opposed to vanilla. its a complex web of how my brain and tastebuds developed and what fealing i hence get from chocolate and how that relates to other fealings or emotions or previous expiriences. i dont CHOOSE to like it, i just prefer it because i have subconcious preference for it. i am sure no1 CHOOSES to be homosexual any more than any1 CHOOSES to be hetrosexual. its NURTURE which is different from CHOICE{nurture can make a biologicall/genetically healthy person into a psychopath without him CHOOSING to be one}.
and as far as nature vs nurture goes, i think homosexuality is a bit of both.
Originally posted by Devil King
Well, I can only assume it had something to do with taking baths with my father as a child, and finding my aunt's old barbie dolls in my grandparent's basement.(Ignore the fact that I also took baths with my mother and that I tortured the barbies and singed off all their hair)
I also recall hearing the word homosexual on television as a kid, on the news if I recall correctly.
(ignore the fact that I already knew what a heterosexual was)
Or, perhaps it was when I put on my mothers high heels and hats when I was playing in her bedroom.
(ignore the fact that I did the same with my father's clothes)
But, I've always subscribed to the idea that it was the moment I realized I had a crush on another guy and spent the next 15 years telling myself that if anyone found out, I'd be an outcast and mocked for feeling the way I did. (By the time I came out at 21, no one was suprised -my grandmother had figured it out when I was 9)
Having raised three boys, my mother has said that there was a noticeable difference in how my straight brother and I behaved, as to how my gay brother behaved, as a child.
Granted, it was nothing outrageous like wearing lipstick or blowing his childhood peers, but there was/are differences from very early on.
Originally posted by leonheartmm
i thin the problem is that people are relating "preferance" to "choice" . if i like chocolate, it isnt necessary that i have a genetic disposition to liking it as opposed to vanilla. its a complex web of how my brain and tastebuds developed and what fealing i hence get from chocolate and how that relates to other fealings or emotions or previous expiriences. i dont CHOOSE to like it, i just prefer it because i have subconcious preference for it. i am sure no1 CHOOSES to be homosexual any more than any1 CHOOSES to be hetrosexual. its NURTURE which is different from CHOICE{nurture can make a biologicall/genetically healthy person into a psychopath without him CHOOSING to be one}.and as far as nature vs nurture goes, i think homosexuality is a bit of both.
Originally posted by Robtard
Having raised three boys, my mother has said that there was a noticeable difference in how my straight brother and I behaved, as to how my gay brother behaved, as a child.
And I'm sure she could also provide some insight in to the behavioral differences between yourself and your other, straight brother. As well as the striking similarities in the way you all act.
Is your gay brother the youngest?
Originally posted by Devil King
And I'm sure she could also provide some insight in to the behavioral differences between yourself and your other, straight brother. As well as the striking similarities in the way you all act.Is your gay brother the youngest?
I'm sure there's similarities overall, but I think she meant more of certain/particular aspects, were my straight brother and I differed from my gay brother.
He's the eldest, it was a hindsight thing for her, she said. Sure it's pseudo-science, but there it is.
Originally posted by Robtard
I'm sure there's similarities overall, but I think she meant more of certain/particular aspects, were my straight brother and I differed from my gay brother.He's the eldest, it was a hindsight thing for her, she said. Sure it's pseudo-science, but there it is.
No, I don't think it's any less valid. A parent is the best person to ask about their children and their personality/development...she was there to see it all. I understand that she was talking about hindsight, but I think that some people would read the original point you made and assume that there is a dramatic difference in the way all gay kids and straight kids behave. (Just a nod to the stereotypers out there)
I had a conversation with my Aunt once about my behavior when I was a kid, and she said that she thought my brother was gay when we were young. Alan was the sensative, emotional one with a tendency to cry and feel the need to express his feelings. I, on the other hand, was the destructive, emotionally-guarded one with a tendancy to bully other kids.
imho its simple coincidence when parents suspect a kid as being homosexual based on personality and turn out to be correct, when weighed against all the incorrect assessments. i dont think there is any way to tell until the kid comes of age and experiences sexual attraction. i believe its more about chemistry/hormones and little to do with character traits. like i said though: IMO
i cant fathom the idea of choice though, and invite anyone to document their own experience of choosing which sex to be attracted to.
Originally posted by Schecter
imho its simple coincidence when parents suspect a kid as being homosexual based on personality and turn out to be correct, when weighed against all the incorrect assessments. i dont think there is any way to tell until the kid comes of age and experiences sexual attraction. i believe its more about chemistry/hormones and little to do with character traits. like i said though: IMO
That's pretty much what I was getting at with my previous post to Robtard. I honestly can't think of any personality trait that has been across-the-board with any of the gay people I know.
Originally posted by Schecter
i cant fathom the idea of choice though, and invite anyone to document their own experience of choosing which sex to be attracted to.
All I hear are crickets.
Originally posted by dadudemon
(I have done similar things as a poster...so I cannot make this statement without being innocent.)How can you post something like that and not realize how wrong that statement is? Since both of us have clearly stated our positions, it serves no further purpose for us to continue to "uh huh, nuh uh, uh huh, nuh uh." Biological factors related to reproduction such as higher levels of testosterone (leading both males and females to have a higher labido) are obviously programmed into the genes. Almost everything about human biology is driven by or related to genetics.(Exceptions would be poisoning or other environmental factors that affects how the body functions..even then, what the person is given as far as genes go, could affect how the body can handle those environmental factors.)
If the urge to copulate is genetic, then there would be no asexuals.
Originally posted by dadudemon
We have been over this already: I am not intending "design" to indicate "intelligent design", I am using design to simply indicate the result of millions of years of natural selection. The penis IS designed for specific functions...so is the vagina. Your arguing my use of the word "designed" does not change that.
Perhaps you should say what it is that you mean.
Originally posted by dadudemon
How does that address my point that "copulation" is incidental to my point that humans are programmed genetically to reproduce, sexually?
If the urge to copulate is incidental to the reproduction, then people would not participate in recreational sex.
Originally posted by dadudemon
That is quite easy to explain since I believe that homosexuality can be genetic...didn't I make that clear? If I didn't, I apologize. Also, it should be possible to become conditioned to preferring specific pheromones. Do you think response to pheromones are indicative of sexual orientation?
“Gay Men Respond Differently to Pheromones” Randolph E. Schmid, Associated PressWashington
—The sexual area of a gay man's brain works a lot like that of a woman when exposed to a particular stimulus, researchers say.In an experiment, men and heterosexual women sniffed a chemical from the male hormone testosterone. The homosexual men's brains responded differently from those of heterosexual males, and in a similar way to the women's brains.
"It is one more piece of evidence . . . that is showing that sexual orientation is not all learned,'' said Sandra Witelson, an expert on brain anatomy and sexual orientation at the Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada.
Witelson, who was not part of the research team, said the findings clearly show a biological involvement in sexual orientation.
The study, published in Tuesday's issue of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, was done by researchers at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden.
They exposed heterosexual men and women and homosexual men to chemicals derived from male and female sex hormones. These chemicals are thought to be pheromones—molecules known to trigger responses such as defense and sex in many animals.
. . . The brains of different groups responded similarly to ordinary odors such as lavender, but differed in their response to the chemicals thought to be pheromones, lead researcher Ivanka Savic said.
The Swedish researchers divided 36 subjects into three groups—heterosexual men, heterosexual women and homosexual men. They studied the brain response to sniffing the chemicals, using PET scans. All the subjects were healthy, unmedicated, right-handed and HIV-negative.
When they sniffed scents like cedar or lavender, all of the subjects' brains reacted only in the olfactory region that handles smells.
But when confronted by a chemical from testosterone, the male hormone, portions of the brains active in sexual activity were activated in straight women and in gay men, but not in straight men, the researchers found.
The response in gay men and straight women was concentrated in the hypothalamus with a maximum in the pre-optic area that is active in hormonal and sensory responses necessary for sexual behavior, the researchers said.
When the female hormone estrogen was used, there was only a response in the olfactory portion of the brains of straight women. Homosexual men had their primary response also in the olfactory area, with a very small reaction in the hypothalamus, while heterosexual men responded strongly in the reproductive region of the brain.
Savic said the group is also doing a study involving homosexual women, but those results are not yet complete.
In a separate study looking at response to body odors, researchers in Philadelphia found sharp differences between gay and straight men and women.
"Our findings support the contention that gender preference has a biological component that is reflected in both the production of different body odors and in the perception of and response to body odors,'' said neuroscientist Charles Wysocki, who led the study.
It's hard to see how a simple choice to be gay or lesbian would influence the production of body odor, he said.
Wysocki's team at the Monell Chemical Senses Center studied the response of 82 heterosexual and homosexual men and heterosexual and homosexual women to the odors of underarm sweat collected from 24 donors of varied gender and sexual orientation.
They found that gay men differed from heterosexual men and women and from lesbian women, both in terms of which body odors gay men preferred and how their own body odors were regarded by the other groups.
Gay men preferred odors from gay men, while odors from gay men were the least preferred by heterosexual men and women and by lesbian women in the study. Their findings, released Monday, are to be published in the journal Psychological Science in September.
The Swedish research was funded by the Swedish Medical Research Council, the Karolinska Institute and the Magnus Bergvall Foundation. Wysocki's research was supported by the Monell Center.
Originally posted by dadudemon
1.Some people copulate specifically to reproduce. (A conscious decision.)
2. Even if the copulating couple does not realize that copulation results in reproduction (not all of the time, of course) it does change the fact that humans are programmed via their genetics to reproduce via copulation. Those urges are reproductive urges, whether or not you chose to recognize that will not change that fact.Those urges are not always be in alignment with reproductive purposes, i.e. a person is born homosexual. That, imo, is not normal as far as biology goes. If a genetic difference hinders a species ability to reproduce offspring to be adapted to its environment (from bad vision, bone diseases, to homosexuality) then it is a mal-adapted genetic difference, from a biological perspective. Do not mistake that for a sociological perspective; I do not consider homosexuals to be malfunctioning units of society.
[list=1][*]This does not change the fact that the vast majority of sexual acts follow from the urge to copulate, not a desire to reproduce.
[*]Again, this is what is being disputed. Repeating that an unsubstantiated conclusion is true does not make it so.[/list]
Originally posted by dadudemon
That is not really explaining why he chose homosexuality. He was clearly a heterosexual male. By his choices, he decided on homosexuality. He wasn't born homosexual. Do you think he wanted a boner in gym class? This was my point. Not everyone who is homosexual are homosexual because they were born that way. (In other words, genetics.) Not everyone is homosexual who claim to be homosexual.
A homosexual participating in opposite-sex sexual experimentation during adolescence is not any more a heterosexual than a heterosexual participating in same-sex sexual experimentation during adolescence is a homosexual.