The Homosexuality Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Duke
- 9,138 comments
- 447,913 views
It's based on my general study of science. Something you don't seem to have bothered with before spouting off your ignorant opinion as fact.
More proof that you are completely ignorant of science and haven't bothered to do even the bare minimum of research before spouting off on topics you know nothing about. There are numerous theories that show how homosexuality can be beneficial to a particular genetic line.
Google "gay uncle theory" for only one of them.
Yet again, the things that you are stating as absolute fact are incorrect. I'm starting to notice a trend.
Last edited by a moderator:
And it's impossible for glaciers to grow in a world that is experiencing a global warming trend? It isn't. It's not only not impossible, it's to be expected. If you actually cared about the topic instead of just toeing the party line, you'd know why.
- 3,321
- United States
- GTP_Sam48
That actually almost happened to me. I had been badly injured a while back and was sent to the hospital. After some awfully painful X-rays, I was wheeled into my room for the night were a nurse, a female nurse who we will call nurse #1, told me I needed to undress for surgery. I thought she was joking since I was told the surgery was to take place the next day, but I concurred anyway, figuring that the nurse knew better than me. Until another nurse, nurse #2, came in and asked nurse #1 why the heck she told me to undress. I then realized the situation, and stepped aside, whilst nurse #1 silently shrugged out of the room with her head down.
Last edited:
Barra333
Premium
- 6,542
- London, ON
- barra333
Not going to comment on the current line of discussion, dont have the time of brain power right now to read all of the posts. However, here is my take on the original question -
I have absolutely no problem with homsexuality, unless it is jammed down my throat (ie. somebody tries to convert me). Please don't confuse this with open conversation on the topic.
I have the same opinion on religious types. I'm not religious and have no problem with people who are, but really object to people knocking at my door to try and convert/recruit me. When was the last time a gay person knocked on the door to tell you about the benifits of their lifestyle?
I have absolutely no problem with homsexuality, unless it is jammed down my throat (ie. somebody tries to convert me). Please don't confuse this with open conversation on the topic.
I have the same opinion on religious types. I'm not religious and have no problem with people who are, but really object to people knocking at my door to try and convert/recruit me. When was the last time a gay person knocked on the door to tell you about the benifits of their lifestyle?
- 678
- BrutherSuperior
Lol, what? So they notice trends on 4chan? Is that what you're saying?
Tell me, does stating your personal, unsupported opinion (an opinion with a serious amount of scientific evidence against it) as fact make you intellectual or scientific?
- 87,588
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Sure. Check the table Denur posted. Where's the ladygays?
Research of this ilk tends to drop the ball in one (or more) of three areas. They either forget about homosexuality in both genders, or they forget the possibility of bisexuality/asexuality (note the above used Kinsey 1-6; Kinsey has 8 points, including 0 and X and if you asked a bisexual person to rank themselves on a scale of 1-6 how straight or gay they were, they wouldn't say "3"), or they get their gay twins from places you're going to find gay twins and not straight or mixed ones ("ascertainment bias").
As for the person in question, it appears he's gone away but he's doing some quite cool research in a different field which involves hardcore biochemistry rather than trying to find a gay gene by picking twins up from gay bars. So 👍
- 685
- BigYoSpeck
I'm of the opinion that as strong as I find the draw towards women, boobs etc.. no man would be able to suppress those urges purely as a lifestyle 'choice' which to me would suggest either an incredibly low sex drive, but still a strong desire for companionship or a genuine physiological draw towards men.
- 2,541
- Netherlands
- Denur; GTP_Denur
See highlighted text.
Also, some men (e.g. priests) are required to suppress those urges, which can be seen as a lifestyle choice. Many are able to do so, but not all.
- 678
- BrutherSuperior
I guess the question I have is how can homosexuality passed down from parents to child?
If mom & dad are tall...their kids are going to be tall.
If mom & dad are intelligent...their kids are going to be intelligent.
If mom & dad are straight...how does a child end up gay?
Going further, what other behavioral attributes are genetic? Even deeper into the rabbit hole; which behavioral traits are triggered by environment and which are not?
Excuse me if I'm inquisitive.
- 685
- BigYoSpeck
If mom and dad have brown hair, how does a child end up with blonde hair? According to you, it's apparently impossible. I suggest you read some extremely basic/introductory texts on genetics, you seem to have no understanding of it whatsoever.
- 678
- BrutherSuperior
- 685
- BigYoSpeck
- 87,588
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Neither of these things is true. The problem is that your actual genes are only half the story of your "genetics", and genetics is only half the story of the result.
Imagine an inherited disease like... ooooh... fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva. If you're unlucky enough to get two copies of that bugger, you're getting the disease. But the disease is only half the story. When does it manifest itself? How severe will it be? When will you die from it? These things are all influenced by environment.
The same goes for height and smarts. You might inherit growth and brain development genes, but these can be chemically and behaviourally influenced both against and in their favour. My parents were 5'7" and 5'4". Their parents were all below 5'8" - one being 5'1". My brother and I are both 5'10". Genetics alone does not explain our height.
So... whither homosexuality?
Firstly, you're assuming they are. You don't need to be a Kinsey 0 (plumbline straight) to have children and many people from the previous generation (born in the 40s, reproducing in the 60s-70s) would have been conditioned out of certain behaviours. As a quick example, left-handedness is inheritable - my nephew is a leftie and I'm a leftie, but no-one else in our family was, even back three generations. Except it turns out that my mum was left-handed, but as a child of the 40s, it was beaten out of her. And no, I'm not making that up - they really did beat left-handed children until they wrote right-handed. It's not hard to imagine that tendencies seen as homosexual were punished even more harshly.
Secondly, you'd have to assume that there is only a genetic component of homosexuality. There hasn't ever been a successfully proven genetic component of homosexuality at all, let alone as a sole cause - the "gay gene" falls down quite badly when it's asked to consider ladygays... That's not to say that there isn't an actual gay gene, just that no attempt to identify one has succeeded so far. And even if one was identified, the gene itself doesn't determine the end-product all by itself as we've seen above with FOP (and it's quite obvious if you have FOP).
But even assuming all of these things, you can still have Straight Guy + Straight Gal = Gay Kid, assuming homosexuality to be a recessive... All you'd need is mum or dad to be a gay carrier - and all they'd need is one gay carrier parent to be potentially gay carriers (and so on) - and one in four kids would be gay. Draw your Punnett Square (or Millard's Box, as a very, very small population of geneticists would say):
GG = Straight, Gg = Carrier, gg = Gay
Gg x Gg = GG, Gg, Gg, gg
I'd say that behavioural traits are largely non-genetic, but environmentally (specifically societally) influenced - there aren't any exceptions I can think of, but again that doesn't mean there aren't any. Even coprolalic Tourette's sufferers are usually only coprolalic when it's least appropriate for them to be so.
So you'd have to conclude that homosexuality isn't a behaviour, but can be genetically and environmentally influenced - and "acting gay" is a behaviour that is only environmentally influenced. Liking the same shape genitals as your own is a choice but one you may not have any control over - you can control the choices you make that determine your mannerisms.
- 2,541
- Netherlands
- Denur; GTP_Denur
I had to make a few corrections. The rest is very educational (as always).
edit>
I always thought that environmental influences during pregnacy have an influence (or are the main trigger) on whether or not a person is born gay (remembering a research by a mister Swaab). So I looked it up and found this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenatal_hormones_and_sexual_orientation
Last edited:
- 24,553
- Frankfort, KY
- GTP_FoolKiller
- FoolKiller1979
I know this isn't what you are talking about, but my cousin and her wife are in the final stages of being accepted into the foster to adopt program. They will be parents and will experience that.
On to scientific advancements being natural. I have a small piece of teflon tubing in my heart attached to tissue from a donated human aorta from someone that dies 20+ years ago. Before that was in there it was a valve from a pig's heart. That is far from natural, I would guess, but it has kept me alive about 25 years longer than nature would have given me if left to her own fancy. And now I am waiting to replace the whole mechanism with a heart donated from someone who died within a few hours of my receiving it. Seeing as nature didn't find it fitting to give us the ability to just pass the Matrix of Life back and forth this is clearly not a natural process either.
I am willing to take a wild guess you wouldn't have any problem with these procedures.
And further touching on that, my wife and I were having trouble conceiving a child and it required surgery on her to make it work. Not natural. And while we didn't have to go that far I know the same process used by homosexuals to have a child are used by heterosexuals to have children in case of infertility. Do you have a problem with these scenarios for heterosexual couples?
This opens a giant can off worms, if that is your reasoning. My father left when I was 12. Many people had one of their parents die when they were young. If a mother and father are required for proper development then you have to ask what you do with single-parent homes. If they are an exception, then why?
Go through the Bible. Write down every single rule given by God, Jesus, or a prophet/apostle speaking in their name. I imagine you will find many you didn't think of as a sin. And then if you did any of those things you will need to offer up a female goat, slit its throat, have the priest spread the blood on the alter as directed by the Lord, and then burn the fat (Leviticus 4:27-31). And I don't know about you, but I like my bacon and medium rare steaks (Leviticus 7:22-27).
And if there is any excuse attempted to be made for why any of these things is not a sin now then it must be asked why some are now fine and not others? Where do we draw that line?
People that can get offended by discussing and debating opinions shouldn't participate in adult debate. No one is offended. But as I pointed out above, claiming certain medical science is not natural leaves a big gap for explaining why any other medical science is OK.
- 2,541
- Netherlands
- Denur; GTP_Denur
I'm not sure where you get your evidence from, but mine is first hand. I have met many gay men and woman in my life (being one does help in that respect) and out of those hundreds of people, I haven't heard from a single one that they were acting gay because they felt like trying something new or to make a statement. A political statement, if you will. Not a single one chooses to be gay, they only choose (myself included) to except the fact and make the best of it. Quite a few almost never come out of the closet and lead a double life by not telling their wife (or husband) and children. Some of those have and had to pay dearly for their frankness (losing all contact with both spouse and children).
So, maybe I misread your comment, but being gay is not a choice for most and unless you provide convincing evidence to the contrary, I feel a bit offended, even if you don't mean to offend.
- 87,588
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Not very useful evidence when you're talking about homosexuality being of exclusively genetic basis - unless you happen to be a researcher in the field of the genetic basis of homosexuality and all your evidence is of that. In which case, get it published and make a fortune.
Fact is, there is no known genetic "cause" of homosexuality. That's not the same thing as there not being a genetic cause for homosexuality, just that all attempts to define one to date have failed. Science modifies its position when new information arises, rather than deciding a position and not changing it despite all attempts to confirm it failing.
For it to not be a choice at all, it has to be wholly genetic in origin - and as my "educational" post pointed out, there is no evidence for that (the "gay gene", which applies only to men and apparently not to lesbians, was debunked in the mid-90s). The fact that it can be conditioned out too - however abhorrent you may find that - would point to it being a choice even if it's genetic in origin and not a conscious one. Note the earlier example of left-handedness which has both genetic and environmental (and societally environmental) components - and people were conditioned out of that too.
This would also mean that being heterosexual is a choice that the individual may not have any control over. Would you suggest this is also offensive? Amusingly I have encountered many who'd suggest that it is - and also some people of varying sexual orientation who believe it offensive that sexuality is akin to an inherited disease. Go figure.
I suspect you're also mixing up being gay (sexually attracted to the same gender) and "acting gay" (a perjorative based on exaggerated mannerisms, such as those demonstrated earlier in the thread by Louis Spence). Being gay - or straight - is a choice over which you may not have control. Subconscious even, if you will. "Acting gay" - or straight - is a choice over which you do have control.
Last edited:
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
Personally, I find the whole "choice or genetics" issue a red herring. It's irrelevant why some people are gay or straight or both. Who should care how other people couple up? No one. Does anybody care that I like chubby brunettes while my friend likes skinny blondes? No - no need to examine WHY that's the case, it just is. Why should it be different if one of us happens to like our own gender?
- 87,588
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
It's a valid point. Whatever the answer, someone's going to be upset. I've met gay and straight (and bi) people who are mortally offended by the suggestion that it's because of their genes and they're gay/straight/bi because they have to be - or, as above, by the suggestion that it isn't and it's all choice (the current reality being that it's in the middle somewhere - like most things genetic are, to be honest).
Put it where you want to put it. Don't get annoyed by where other people want to put it.
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
I don't make a fuss over people's choice or genetics in this matter. I've known and been friends with a several gay people. I enjoy living in a city, Seattle, which is congenial and tolerant to alternate lifestyles. However, I would modestly prefer that the human race not immediately perish from the Earth, and so your basic procreation and nuclear family still has utility. I'm no trained biologist, but I'll make a wild guess that males coupling with females have an inherently better chance of producing successful offspring than do gay couples. So, to the extent that one cares about the future of the human race, one should prefer straight coupling, I should think.
Respectfully submitted, eager for correction,
Dotini
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
I've had that argument with my Jewish friends. They claim "it's not necessarily about the religion; it's about the community." I submit that, if you care about being part of a community, the best way to do so is NOT to alienate a large portion of them. But that's probably a separate discussion.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked
