91 replies to this topic

[The Dark Empire]

I hate to play psychology professor but you guys are forgetting that the human experience is very complicated and cannot be explained in single answers but a multiple of answers. There is always the biological theory, social cognitive theory, evolutionary theory, etc. Alone each theory is flawed but when you combine them you find a theory that more accurately describes what happens across a larger variety of situations. I definitely do agree there is a biological factor that can cause homosexuality. In fact I believe that hormones in the womb influence it greatly. Bam biological factor. But just because you found one conclusive factor doesn't mean it is the only one. Psychologists and scientists keep looking and ruling out more. I believe people can be conditioned and conform to things that they wouldn't do on their own. Peer pressure, fitting in, and conditioned responses can cause a person to have homosexual tendencies. One example that comes to mind are people who are gay all their lives then realize they are straight. Biological factor and social cognitive factor. The opposite is true too. Straight all your life when you finally realize you are gay. Deep down you were always one or the other but you acted on a different way. Social cognitive factor as well as a biological basis for homosexualality. I could make a choice to be gay tomorrow even though I'm straight. I could live the rest of my life considered a gay man. No one else would know but me and I would be classified as homosexual even though biologically I have urged for the opposite sex.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

You are equating homosexual acts with homosexual orientation; they are not the same thing.  Anyone can engage in homosexual acts, but that does not make them gay.  People forced to live in exclusively same-sex environments (prison, unisex boarding schools, etc.) often engage in homosexual acts.  And yes, no doubt there is some small percentage of people who live as gay men or women, engage in homosexual acts by choice, etc., but who are not intrinsically "gay" by orientation.  But there are far more people who do the opposite, i.e. gays who pretend to be straight.  The reasons for this should be immediately apparent, given societal attitudes toward homosexuality.  There are a lot more incentives for gay people to pretend to be straight than for straight people to pretend to be gay.

 

Simply put, being gay (or straight) is not what you do, it's what you are.  You can no more "decide to be gay" than you can decide to have blue eyes.

[Manoka]

Sorry, I added some fuel to the fire but LOL

 

On a more sirz note I don't really care where the issue comes from; people have a right to be with who they want, provided consent and age, even if it's weird.

 

 

That being said, Homos are pretty weird, not gonna lie.

 

But I don't hate them for it.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Sorry, I added some fuel to the fire but LOL

 

On a more sirz note I don't really care where the issue comes from; people have a right to be with who they want, provided consent and age, even if it's weird.

 

Well said.

[Manoka]

We still haven't proven a mechanism, but if one exists, I highly doubt it's something contagious.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Actually they have the biology pretty well isolated.

[Manoka]

Well, what's the mechanism?

 

Genetic, maternal care, hormones etc.

[The Dark Empire]

What the mind can conceive and believe it can achieve.

[The Dark Empire]

Let me put it this way. Biological factors have definitely been proven but environmental factors are yet to be decisively disproven.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

No one is trying to disprove environmental factors.  As with most things, it is a gestalt of the two.  But the biological conditions must exist in order for environmental factors to come into play.  You can't make someone gay who is not.  Sort of like how you can't teach a cat to fly.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

What the mind can conceive and believe it can achieve.

 

That's ridiculous.  I can conceive of any number of things that cannot be achieved.

[Manoka]

No one is trying to disprove environmental factors.  As with most things, it is a gestalt of the two.  But the biological conditions must exist in order for environmental factors to come into play.  You can't make someone gay who is not.  Sort of like how you can't teach a cat to fly.

 

Except gays aren't cats and nor is being gay flying; since it's inside the head, there's all kinds of potential cuases for it.

 

It's a mental thing.

 

 

The argument it has to be a biological thing is silly.

 

Yes, obviously it occurs in the brain, so it's biological, the question is why does it occur?

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Like all human behavior, homosexuality is the result of a gestalt of biological and environmental factors.  The biology part is fairly well understood (although not fully); the environmental part less so.  But the biology is fundamental.  You can't teach cats to fly because they don't have wings; you can't make a straight person gay (or a gay person straight) because they don't have the right underlying biology (both genetic and developmental).  My own expertise is only tangentially related to this area, but I have a good friend who has studied the subject extensively and could offer more resources to anyone who is interested.  In the meantime here are a few good places to start:

 

Science of Desire: The Gay Gene and the Biology of Behavior

 

The Life of the Gay Gene: From Hypothetical Genetic Marker to Social Reality

 

Linkage between sexual orientation and chromosome Xq28 in males but not in females

 

Homosexuality, type 1: An Xq28 phenomenon

[Manoka]

There really hasn't ever been a gay gene found.

 

 

"Hamer's results immediately were criticized for various methodological and procedural flaws. First, the fact that fraternal twins displayed double the incidence rates of homosexuality compared to siblings contradicted a solely genetic approach, since these two groups share essentially the same amount of DNA. Also, adopted siblings were found to have the same 10% incidence rate as related siblings, even though adopted siblings share virtually no genes in common- only environment. Furthermore, Hamer did not check to see if the heterosexual brothers of gay men also display the Xq28 marker, which could have disproved its relationship to sexual orientation. Whether or not Hamer's results were statistically signifigant was also called into question.

 

A similar study by the same team conducted in 1995, again based on Italian material corroborated Hamer's initial results, but failed to find a link to the Xq28 gene among homosexual females. A further study of these results in 1999 disputed Hamer's original results. Studying Canadian material consisting of 52 pairs of gay brothers, George Rice and others found no statistically significant linkage in alleles and haplyotypes and concluded against an X-linked male homosexuality gene. When the disputing study was published in Science, Hamer responded by defending his original results and cited possible problems with how Rice's team selected their study subjects"

 

 

Again, no biological approach has really been found.

[The Dark Empire]

A wise man is wise because he is open to knowledge. A foolish man is foolish because he cannot see past what he already knows. Just saying you guys really stick to your guns instead of acknowledging the fact there may be more than one answer to the question. It all depends on who you ask. It's better to know all the possible solutions and not just one.

[Redezra]

The wise man is also wise because he can sense bullshit on the winds. never forget that.

 

I'm not saying that environment does not play a part, I'm more saying that evidence shows that your genetic makeup is the template on which the environment acts. You can be genetically predisposed to being gay, and you can be genetically predisposed to being straight. Just like people can be genetically predisposed to being athletes, or whatever.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Lol @ Manoka.  There have been a lot of developments since 1995. 

 

Anyway, you are free to believe what you like, regardless of what the evidence shows.  For myself, I think we've beaten this one to death.

 

Again.

 

[Haflinger]

Thrash, how does you not being gay or disliking gay people in any way make you a victim?

[Redezra]

Because he's being oppressed. Apparrently.

[Thrash]

Thrash, how does you not being gay or disliking gay people in any way make you a victim?

 

First off, I don't "dislike" gay people.

 

And to the second part, would you like me to run down the list of things I've been called, people who have shunned me, etc, because I don't support gay marriage? Unlike those people, I don't resort to personal attacks when someone has a difference of opinion then me.