I like to lick all the grease off a sausage, slowly, then nibble it, before I eat it. But apparantly this is gay. Who knew?
That guy figured it out with his laws against magnets
No magnets, no problem, Magneto is gay!
-
Buy a virtually any textbook for a sex and gender studies class.
-
Read it.
-
???
-
Profit.
You have to be careful how you define the word sexuality.
Virtually all environmental factors are behaviorally linked and associated with some basic and hormonally driven sexual impulse. Think Pavlov and his dogs, only instead of the bell inheriting the power to make a dog salivate from the food we’re talking about a car making a man aroused because he’s seen one too many sexy women spread eagle atop a hood.
Theoretically speaking, the car alone did not have the power to make the man aroused, just as the bell alone did not have the power to make the dogs salivate. It had to be associated with some basic drive.
We know that sex is primarily hormone driven, which is why we can use drugs to suppress sexual urges, and why people are more or less interested in sex at different stages of their life cycle.
To put it simply, while our hormones might determine our basic sexual functioning our environment often determines how those passions are acted upon.
Let me help you out there, Matriarch.
http://www.webmd.com/brain/news/20080616/gay-brain-shows-gender-atypical-traits
All evidence points to the development of sexuality happening in the brain with hormones/pheromones playing a major role. Honestly, before I even got into researching this info, I thought it was common sense that sexuality was innately developed. We can’t possibly choose our own sexuality with our own free will. If that was the case, then every gay person would choose to be straight. Who would want to deal with the pressure of being gay? All those gay teens who commit suicide could’ve easily chosen to be straight by that logic. But not once has that happened. Why?
Maybe because it’s too late
Inherent in your response is the admission that by way of careful control, dumb luck or anything in between it is possible to turn someone gay. There is no need to invoke the term ‘choice’, which is a strawman/red herring (depending on situation).
Can’t say I’m surprised Matriarch didn’t site sources and instead gave a weak, lazy answer. Truly a refection on her lack in intellect, lack in overall argumentative skills, and weak character.
Anyway, enough about the rabble.
I’ll respond to the person who actually bothered to site sources.
So I read these articles and they do indeed give strong evidence that sexual preference is innate and involves a chemical/hormonal reaction. That’s something I never really questioned, as, like you stated, if ones sexual preference was as simple as choosing a Honda or a Ford, we would see a lot more ambiguity in sexual choices.
What I was really looking for was evidence that one is born gay (or straight, for that matter). Brain development continues well past birth, and external stimulus does effect how the human brain develops. Therefore, these studies on adult men and women aren’t giving any insight on how their brains were when they were born.
So yes, I’m still waiting for that proof.
To Matriarch:
Gender studies IS NOT SCIENCE. Gender studies is more akin to a political movement or lobby. The studies they do are not even unbiased since they clearly have an agenda that clouds their judgement and causes their statistics to be inaccurate. Imagine if I did a study in which little boys showed to have superior IQs to little girls, and all of my data was able to be replicated and there was no error in the methods of my study. Could I be published in a gender studies journal? Yeah, that’s why it isn’t science.
To Facepalm:
- Homosexuality fails the identical twin test. If it were truely genetic, then a twin of a homosexual would have to have a greater than 92% chance of occuring in the twin. This is not the case with homosexuality, which makes the case for genetics highly unlikely.
- If there is truly a genetic link to homosexuality, then it is a disease and it would be possible to cure with gene therapy/drugs. The issue is that we as a society have decided that homosexuality is not a disease, and therefore linking it to a genetic cause is contrary to what the movement really needs to be doing.
http://www.hollanddavis.com/?p=3647
http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1993-homosexual-orientation-in-twins.html
It’s not my job to educate your ignorance. If you want to say dumb shit and make an ass out of yourself be my guest. The comments you’ve made illustrate just how little you know about this topic.
Just because you demand I post links doesn’t mean I have to. Do your own damn research.
Other people could just as easily demand you post links to back up your claims.
To do this we’d have to control for the environment of the child, which would end up being highly unethical.
It’s easy to sit back and say what studies need to happen and what needs to be proven. But you’re not considering the logistics and ethical implications of the study. The social sciences simply cannot implement the same techniques used by other sciences simply because of the ethical concerns.
For example, a chemist can create numerous copies of a compound in isolation and then subject it to different combinations of other compounds and environmental factors to see how it will react and change over time. Doing an analogous study on humans would create a myriad of ethical issues.
There’s a reason why Nazi scientists weren’t having a good day at the Nuremberg trials.
Sex and gender studies is a broad topic, incorporating research, theory, and politics. Science is a part of it but science is often limited in this subject because of the human factors I spoke of above.
We also know homosexuals tend to have straight children. Homosexuality itself is pretty rare in the population (most estimates place it around 10%).
What we do know is that your hormones and body chemistry affect sexuality more than anything else. We also know that that homosexuals tend to have brain structure and other physical traits more commonly seen by typical members of the opposite sex.
Even in the study quoted here it says:
lol nice try.
You had your chance to try to back up your claim, but instead you cowered behind a smart-ass remark, hoping someone would save you from trying to use facts.
Now that that miserable plan has failed, you are desperately trying to pin the burden of proof on me. It’s your claim, not mine; and if you cant prove that claim, it’s as weak as the mind it came from.
But don’t worry: as you can see, I figured you out. Someone told you something that you want to believe is true, and you accepted it. Now that that belief been challenged, you are trying to avoid the revelation that it might be bullshit.
Therefore, there is no reason to drag this on any further. I dismiss you. Go back to that twisted little world view full of lies you find so comforting.
not based
Hey asshole, I’m gay.
I went through puberty being attracted to girls. I tried to be normal. For a long time I hated myself for not being straight.
The struggle is real, and lots of homosexuals go through something very similar. Some struggle so badly because they’re convinced their sexuality is a choice. They blame themselves to the point of self harm (go check out the staggering stats on homosexual depression and suicide, I’m not posting that shit for your lazy ass).
If I wasn’t a decent person I’d tell you to try and change your sexuality and show us all it’s possible. But I know what that does to a person and it isn’t pretty.
Regardless of where sexuality sits in the nature vs. nurture issue I think it’s pretty clear that it’s something that goes far beyond conscious choice.
Ho har at people who believe in freedom of choice.
Homosexuality is not a joke, though they have a creative insight on the world that is beneficial for our future. But I most definitely don’t think their sexual insight pertains to heterosexuality at all, two completely different worlds
See your problem is that you tried to be normal based on cultural perceptions and standards. The struggle only exists because being gay for some reason is a problem. Well, non gays feel that gays marrying ruins their established institutions and traditions, and I really don’t blame em. Civil Union should be the term any government uses when people marry through law, rather than use the word marriage. Words matter, so this shouldn’t be up for debate.
If Homosexuality is a genetic issue, we have an ethical obligation to offer a cure to anybody that wants it, and a bigger obligation to not make it such a big deal. A retard didn’t choose to be born that retarded, it was just given to him by chance. We don’t deny them their rights.
If Homosexuality is the result of some trauma (physically/mentally), people still need to get over the fact that person A likes the same sex. We don’t kill or banish people that have suffered severe trauma anymore, why should the same be for something as trivial as preference of sex?
IMO, Homosexuality is just an extended manifestation of programmed behavior to enjoy and seek out sex (As far as I know, there is no gene that dictates if an animal engages in sex for sheer pleasure). It would be no different than our instinct to breathe or to be curios and observant of the world around us. It’s simply some instinctual feeling said person experiences can feel about the same sex. Not every body has it, just like not every body is curious about the world around them. It’s simple instinctual programming that’s more on the abstract side of consciousness.
The sentence before the paragraph you quoted, “Sexual orientation is biologically but not genetically determined in utero by biochemical mechanisms which remain to be identified.” I never said that there weren’t biological differences in homosexuals, just that those differences were likely not genetic. Mental development and hormones can be greatly influenced by environmental factors, which could be the case here.
Genetics only raises possibilities, and that doesn’t mean “possibilities of being gay” it means possibilities of being effected by various types of stimuli
Sexuality by definition is a choice since sex itself is an action and there fore something you choose to do or not to do. You don’t HAVE to have sex you might really really really really really really really wanna have sex, but you don’t have to.
So if someone hates all black people but never acts on it they’re not racist?
No dude…just…no. This viewpoint on sexuality is incredibly narrow.
Also what the fuck is common core?
Irrelevant but I’ll humor you because yes it is the same concept.
Being racist means you treat people a certain kind of way, you cant treat me any kind of way with your thoughts and emotions. That’s what separates us from the animals, free will, the ability to recognize when we have a choice and say yes or no. So when your brain says “Hey he’s black be a dick to him” and you say “No” you’ve exercised your free will and chosen NOT to be racist.