Discussion in 'Human Science' started by Thoreau, Oct 22, 2013.
Because "homophobic" is a polite euphemism for "asshole."
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
If you get your rocks off by being pissed on or craped on then that's your bussiness. And I don't want to know about it.... if you have a special sexual fetish don't tell me I'm married... and I won't tell ya mine.
I have never placed much stock in the DSM. It is an attempt to create discrete categories for effectively continuous phenomena. It has value for mental health workers to categorize their work, but does a very poor job of categorizing human behavior - and has historically carried societal prejudices and mores in its supposedly objective definitions.
Definitely. And this is true for more than just sickle cell anemia, which at first glance appears to reduce reproductive fitness.
Thus the blanket statement "homosexuality cannot be genetic since it would be 'evolved out' over time" might also be missing a very subtle personal/societal benefit.
I'd disagree here. I was the very definition of "homophobic" for the first 17 years or so of my life. I had simply never met anyone who was gay and had a completely unrealistic view of what homosexuality meant. For me, homophobia was due to pure ignorance. (I was probably also an asshole during that time, but I don't think that was the reason!)
So why do you have to insult someone who does not agree with you.
I sense that some Posters here are suggesting that I am homophobic. Considering the following from an earlier post of mine, I deny the allegation & defy the alegators.
BTW: I happen to be an atheist. If I lived in Salem at the time of the witch trials, I would consider a person who admitted to being an atheist at least neurotic & possibly suicidal.
Sorry, I meant to insult the people who insist that homosexuality is a choice. It's clearly not inherited.
Living in Hollywood for many years, I had a chance to talk to a lot of gay guys. Nine out of ten said, "I'm happy with who I am today. But when I was 12 and first discovering sexuality, if someone had offered me the choice I would not have made this one. It's just too hard a life. And this is Hollywood, where all of you wonderful kind liberal people are so accepting of us. I can't imagine someone making this choice in Kansas!"
We don't really know what causes a particular sexual orientation. But we absolutely know that it is not heredity, and it is not a choice.
STUDY: Male Homosexuality Has Strong Genetic Basis Offset By Increased Female Fertility
By Zack Ford on June 14, 2012 at 9:50 am
"Italian researchers have made a new discovery that solidifies the understanding that homosexuality — at least in men — has a strong genetic component. Though this study does not identify a specific gay gene, which probably does not exist, it does demonstrate what role genetics play.
Andrea Camperio Ciani at the University of Padova discovered that the mothers and maternal aunts of gay men tend to have significantly more offspring than those of straight men. There seems to be at least one gene on the X chromosome that creates a trade-off in men and women. The men turn out gay (and hypothetically less likely to reproduce), but the women’s fecundity increases, making them more likely to have more offspring. In a sense, the gene makes men more attracted to men, but the women more attractive to men. Not only are they more fertile and have less complications during pregnancy, but these women are also more extroverted and have few family problems and social anxieties.
This is called the “balancing selection hypothesis,” and it effectively demonstrates how male homosexuality —as documented not only in humans but hundreds of species — does not actually contradict expectations that evolution favors reproduction. Still, homosexuality is clearly not determined by a single factor. Studies have shown, for example, that exposure to certain levels of hormones in the womb can play a role in sexuality. Twin studies also suggest other genetic components, even in women. But this research may help explain why female sexuality tends to be more fluid while men’s tends to be more fixed; this “trade-off” gene may just not be playing the same role.
Scientists may never fully identity what complex combination of factors determines sexuality, but there is still plenty of evidence to conclude that it is natural and healthy part of human diversity. With each new discovery about the nature of homosexuality, discrimination against people for being gay becomes more repugnantly indefensible."--http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/06/14/499483/study-male-genetic-homosexuality/
You're talking about a sexual orientation here that has been traditionally and religiously demonized for two millenia. Even today there are segments of society who bully kids for being gay. The stigma against it is more than enough to explain why there are so many more psychological problems for gay people than straight. It has nothing to do with it being neurotic. It has to do with the homophobia that still exists in our society. And you and your ilk are an example of that very bigotry. Talk about dinosaurs!
We're talking an orientation here and not just a behavior. And just like being left-handed, it is an orientation that has a strong genetic component. Twin studies established this long ago, among other findings:
"Several studies also have shown that homosexuality tends to run in families. The probability that the brother of a gay man is gay is about four times higher than normal. Similarly, the odds that the sister of a lesbian is also a lesbian is significantly higher than normal. However, male homosexuality and lesbianism tend to run in different families: sisters with gay brothers are not more likely than normal to be lesbian. A 1993 study that traced the pedigree of pairs of gay brothers found that homosexuality tends to run on the maternal side of the family tree: the brothers had a higher than average number of maternal nephews and uncles who are gay.
• Identical twin studies shed additional light on the genetic underpinnings of sexual preference. If there are differences in preference between identical twins, who share the same genes, then that difference cannot be genetic. Here, the research indicates that in cases where one identical male twin is gay, about half the time the other twin is gay as well. "This is way above 4 percent, so it's got to be genetic, but it is nowhere near 100 percent," Goldstein said. The percentages for lesbian twins are slightly lower, but generally comparable.
• DNA studies have identified the general location of at least one "gay gene." The maternal heritability of male homosexuality narrowed the region where such a gene must reside to the X chromosome, because sons get this chromosome from their mother. Analysis of DNA markers on the X chromosomes of sibling pairs has further narrowed the search to a region called XQ28. It consists of hundreds of genes and is located near the tip of the X chromosome. However, there is some indication that genes located elsewhere may have a similar effect on sexual orientation, Goldstein said.
• Fetal development studies suggest how such a gene might influence such a complex behavior. The development of a fetus into a male is accomplished by the development of the testes, which produce testosterone, which has a wide range of physiological effects. During the perinatal period, a week before and after birth, testosterone has an irreversible organizing effect on the body and brain of males. If the hormone is absent during this period, the individual's anatomy and behavior never can become wholly male. A testosterone surge during puberty activates male sexual development and behavior.
• Differences between gay and straight sexual orientation appear at a very early age. In a study, a group of openly homosexual men were asked when they first became aware of their attraction to men and boys, when they realized that they were gay and when they "came out" to others. The group reported becoming aware of their attraction at a very young age, between 5 years old and puberty. Self-awareness of their sexual orientation took place around puberty, and coming out of the closet took place much later."---http://news.stanford.edu/pr/95/950310Arc5328.html
Reading this I immediately thought of this story in which 3 out of 4 of this pastor's children are gay.
I am a bigot also . Can you stop bringing homosexuality in to the forum . I am sure you have posted other interesting posts , do yo have to bring this perversion , or is it that you are a pervert and trying to justify your behavior
This is a thread about fetishes and sexual attraction, posted by an openly gay poster. If you don't want to read it, don't. (Or if you like reading it, then read it and stop complaining that it "shouldn't be here.")
Reported for unsolicited insults...
you are absolutely right , I am out
We "know" it is not a choice by the same self-reported, subjective, and anecdotal evidence that we "know" (from theists) that a god exists. Since we have cases of changing orientation (even multiple times) and this "evidence" seeming to be no more than any strong compulsion, it is both not wholly hereditary and perhaps a choice. Anyone else with any sufficiently strong compulsion would report the same lack of choice that LGBT do.
If being wholly objective on the matter makes someone an asshole then perhaps you should examine your own bias.
"Normal variance" (a statistical term) loses meaning if applied to a selective "small percentage of the population". That would only be a way to "normalize" the otherwise abnormal.
That also does not mean that such an omnivore would necessarily become suicidal. There are countless specialized interest groups that both find themselves at odds with society at large and are not especially suicidal as a result.
This from a study that is specifically about "Biological basis of sexual orientation" and conveniently omitting the introduction:
STANFORD -- Research into the biological basis of sexual orientation "presents a clear double message. Yes, genetics plays a part. No, it is not all genetics," Dora B. Goldstein, professor emeritus of molecular pharmacology, told the audience that attended the first in a series of public lectures sponsored by the Medical Center's Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual Community on March 9.
"This shouldn't be too surprising because that is what all kinds of behavioral studies indicate. Genes determine everything. The environment affects everything. Then there is this big area where the two interact," she added. - http://news.stanford.edu/pr/95/950310Arc5328.html
IOW, this study simply did not address the non-biological factors, which its author freely admits are relevant.
Duh yeah. An article specifically about the biological basis of homosexuality did not address the environmental factors. That's obvious. So what? It was never intended to.
Separate names with a comma.