Homosexuality & Anterior hypothalamus

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by ArtofWar, Dec 20, 2005.

  1. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Well, religion and science are both hand in hand on this, and they change their defintions to include 'desires' at one time to 'behaviour' at others and both, at still other times, according to their convenience. The ambiguous usage of the word 'homosexuality' of course raises a lot of confusion amongst people and meddles the issue, but then that is what they desire.

    Their purpose is to beat the same-sex needs of humans by hood or crook, and they want to make use of these powerful institutions (of religion and science) to do it. Science just pretends to be 'objective'.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    Like what I said earlier about homo being a dirty word.
    The mere fact that it's isolated into an extreme minority group ensures that there really is no other viable option.

    How many people are actually told when they are growing up that homosexuality is an acceptable option?

    What I have seen of male-male sexuality in Afghanistan raises a question for me:

    There are places where apparently a much larger than normal percentage of men express attraction towards their own gender.
    One man in an interview simply said that it was because women were separated from men (veiled) and were not allowed to mingle socially. The genders were segregated, and therefore of course he was prevented from actually seeking a mate of the opposite gender.

    Does this prove that heterosexuality is being prevented, and men are seeking alternatives?
    Or does this prove that homosexuality is something that comes naturally from men relating to other men, without the pressure to bond with the opposite sex?
    That is, that they are not just seeking an alternative to heterosexuality, but it is an actual expression of their own attraction for each other that hasn't been forced into hiding by a control structure? That it is a natural attraction that exists NATURALLY, and has not yet been adulterated by pro-heterosexual doctrines?

    It is always said that if men are deprived of women, they will seek other outlets. This supposedly explains homoerotic behavior in jails and prisons.
    Dominance is also a favored explanation for this behavior, not only in humans but in seemingly homosexual behavior in nature as well.

    How do they know it isn't something that has always existed, but has been suppressed and forced to conform to heterosexual dogmas?

    Which came first?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    I actually was going to put this in the forum about believing in strange things, but it fits here as well.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    I'm a heterosexual. I am able and willing to reproduce, therefore I feel it necessary to state that I am straight!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Couldn't help myself.
     
  8. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Giambattista, you've to understand that social masculinity is the singlemost important factor in a straight (meaning mainstream) man's life --- and he would literally sometimes rather embrace death than to be deprived of it.

    Homosexual is a space which is basically and essentially a feminine space. It was created by feminine gendered males --- transvestites if you please. In the traditional societies these groups are known as the third sex, and are not seen as men. It is a highly stigmatised group, which means that adopting this identity immediately robs the person of his social masculinity (straight status).

    This in itself is reason enough for men to disown their sexual need for men. You don't need any socio-relgious santions. Men can and do fight social injunctions on their freedom, but this there is no way men can fight.
     
  9. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    I should also add that they maintain that everyone is naturally heterosexual, but that something goes "wrong" and some people end up getting "confused" so to them there is no such thing as a true homosexual!
     
  10. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    You have to undertstand that traditional societies also operate under the pressures of social masculinity, and the nature of the pressures are basically the same as in a heterosexual society: suppress your sexual need for men, and exaggerate your sexual need for women. The only difference that makes life easier for men in traditional societies are as follows:

    - The nature of the society --- i.e. men only and woman only, which makes the sexual pressures a bit distant. All you have to do to prove your interest in women is to just talk about it and pretend.

    - This also means that men have more space to give vent to their same sex needs. All male only groups have this same-sex eroticism --- even in the heterosexual west, even where the girls are available in abundance, e.g. in college fraternities. In the peer group it is accepted that men will have sex with each other, although this is generally well hidden from women.

    - The absence of a 'heterosexual' and more importantly a 'homosexual' identity, which points more to the fact that the society is not heterosexualised.

    Now you have to understand how the Afghani men react formally when asked to comment about this in the light of their social masculinity pressures. And when the person to ask this is a 'homosexual', they would be doubly eager to distance themselves from him.

    Men need excuses like non-availability of women to give them a facade to have sex with each other. It is the same in all major societies. The heterosexual society cleverly tries to deal with this by instituting women in every male space so as to take away this 'excuse' from men and 'corner' them on this.

    Yet, in Afghanistan e.g., guys marry young, and they can have several wives. Surely, enough for men if they are as heterosexual as they claim in the west --- that they feel like puking when they see two men kissing on the screen, and find holding hands with each other really repulsive. You can leave me on an island for lifelong with just a dog. I can assure you I'll not touch that dog with a barge pole, and satisfy myself with imagination and self-masturbation.

    Even the notion that men can resort to sex with other men in order to fulfill their sexual desires proves it amply that they have it in them, even if we assume (for this discussion's sake) that it is secondary to a desire for women. Even this secondary desire flies right in the face of the presumption of heterosexuality which assumes that most men are incapable of being aroused by other men.
     
  11. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    The only confusion that is there is the fear of making that great transition from 'straight' to 'gay' and the huge social and personal costs that it involves. Including sacrificing one's social masculinity.
     
  12. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Please refer to the thread "nature vs nurture" where it is clearly proved that the environment cannot create in humans something that is not already there. Some amount of divergence from the nature is possible, but only with extreme pressures (take the example of the climber plant which is forced to grow downwards). Pressures which are missing here.
     
  13. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Talk about 'homosexuality' as a valid option and men/ boys will ignore you like anything, and tell you they are not homosexuals, nor do they have any such feelings. That is something I have learnt clearly.

    You have to understand that using the word 'homosexuality' makes the act or desire of male-male bonds contrary to the 'social masculinity' of men. And men know instinctively what is good for their social masculinity and what is not! They will immediately reject it.

    You have to cautiously and carefully talk about same-sex needs outside the context or definition of the term or concept of 'homosexuality', and rather than talk about 'identities', talk about the feelings and desires. And you have to stress that all men have these desires. It will take some time before the boys can feel safe to open up about their same-sex feelings. But once they do, they will give you some important information/ indications, though they will still be cautious about what they say.

    Of course the above will not work with adult, married men. Not always.
     
  14. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    Now, I had a while back been thinking about pheromones and the limited research on sex-attractant hormones in humans and their effects on the senses. Apparently no single human pheromone has been isolated, at least not to my knowledge, though apparently SOMETHING is present in sweat and other body fluids (apparently in female urine!!!).

    Anyhow, I recently read about a study revolving around sweat-extracts from both males and females, gay and straight. Apparently bisexuals were included, but they didn't include those results from what I read, and I'm puzzled.

    Gay males overall preferred the sweat from other gay males. The samples were "blinded" if you would, no one knew which was which. They were simply asked to rate the scents they liked best.

    Does this prove or refute the hypothalamus and other studies indicating that at least gay MALES differ biologically?
    Is this a biological difference present at birth?

    Or is it maybe an EMOTIONAL excretion of some sort?

    Many different emotions release different hormones into the bloodstream.
    Is there maybe some difference in the EMOTIONAL state of gay men that would cause a different ratio of certain chemicals to be present in their sweat? I personally think that's a good theory!

    It is unfortunate that I could not find what the results were for those identifying as bisexual.

    And what ABOUT bisexuality?
    Studies on the brain structure assume that everyone is either in the heterosexual majority, or the homosexual minority. The discrepancies in the results of these studies, coupled with the fact that they rarely take into account those who identify as bisexual, raises serious questions about these studies and their efficacy.

    And of course several studies regarding populations at large and sexual preference have sometimes demonstrated a high number of people who register attraction to both sexes, or their own in particular.
    Conservative Christians, who are the most vocal anti-homosexual group in general, tend to use statistics which give the smallest return for those identifying as exclusively homosexual. The percentage quoted by these people is generally no greater than 2%. It is obvious they wish to isolate and marginalize same-sex attraction to serve their own agendas, by demonstrating they are nothing more than an aberration from normalcy.

    What of the studies that show between 20 and 30% of men acknowledge some type of same-gender attraction at some point in their life? This is ONLY acknowledgement. Such studies cannot always get a straight answer about a subject that is so contentious. In fact, some researchers have concluded that because it is such a touchy subject, the numbers may be higher.

    All of the biological and genetic studies on homosexuality are going on the assumption that you are EITHER/OR. They rarely address those who are BOTH. Which is why I personally believe they are flawed in that respect.
    Either the switch is ON, or it is OFF, and we should be able to determine scientifically which position the switch is in.
    That is the reasoning I often see.

    I put a couple different topics into one here, though they are really all related.
     
  15. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    What they know is that they can get away with any amount of lie, however big it is! And this is reason enough for them to say what they do.

    Might is right!

    After all these are the excuses (like the unavailability of women) that men have been using for generations (before heterosexuality came!) to find a socially acceptable excuse to relate sexually with other men, in the face of heavy social pressures against such bonds. 'Science' readily picks up these excuses and shows them as the truth. After all science is based on 'seeing is believing'. And what appears is always the truth --- right!

    'Science' thou art great!
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2006
  16. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    What's the matter with ya! You're exhausting me....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    But I admit I love it.

    I think you've not really got the essence of how they fool the public with their manipulative researches in these studies on human sexuality. (You've missed my earlier posts I guess).

    The question keeps coming back to 'who or what is 'gay''. It has not been answered satisfactorily by anyone.

    So what is the guarantee that what they found as evidence for 'sexual orientation' is actually evidence for 'gender orientation' (see the thread Gender orientation is biological --- when they have mostly feminine gendered males in their studies (majority of the homosexually identified men are feminine gendered!).

    What is the guarantee that the 'heterosexually' identified men, are not aroused by men secretly --- as we know that this phenomenon exists --- if you want to downplay what I've been saying.

    Did they include 'transexual' heterosexuals? Did they mention the 'gender orientation' of their samples? Why would they when the western culture (and hence science doesn't acknowledge gender as natural/ biological)?

    This is the problem that is with their study.

    I should add that in my observation/ analysis, it does seem that gay men (feminien gendered males) tend to prefer other gay men. While straight men tend to be attracted by straight qualities in men. By straight I don't mean 'heterosexual', but naturally masculine (as against one with just social masculinity).
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2006
  17. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    And of course, you have to realise that most of these people see the creation story at the beginning of the Bible as PROOF POSITIVE that man and woman are made for each other. There is no other alternative.

    This helps explain why they view homosexuality and same-gender attractions as nothing more than a slight "misunderstanding" because God "NEVER MADE HOMOSEXUALS! EVERYONE IS HETEROSEXUAL! EVERYTHING ELSE IS OF THE DEVIL!"
     
  18. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    The whole notion of gay/ straight is faulty. The only biological difference between men is that of gender. Not sexuality.

    Men have same sex attractions as their primary drive. It is the opposite sex drive that is an add on and that needs exlanation/ cause. (see the entire page of this link "Is heterosexuality unnatural?" and the thread "Darwin was wrong about sexuality
     
  19. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Thankfully, we don't have such notions in our religion/ society.
     
  20. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    I've read most of those threads already, but I guess I shall go over them again.
     
  21. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    Out of the men you have counseled, what is the ratio of those who identify as gay to those who identify as straight/heterosexual but are also attracted to men?
     
  22. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    It was a blind study from what I remember, that is, no one knew which samples they smelling before they did. Similar to a blindfolded taste-test.

    If I remember correctly, and maybe you should look this up on the net, but the MEN who identified as gay were the LEAST favorite scent of the other test groups.

    Now, keep in mind that they mentioned that there were bisexuals in the group, or that they intended to do another test with them (I don't remember which) but they never gave the results of those. And yes, you are right about the transexuals. I don't think they were included.

    The results were just OVERALL generalizations. In general, gay men tended to prefer other gay men's scents, and both straight men, women, and lesbians, tended to like gay men's scents the least! We of course don't know which gay men were preferred more, and whether they were feminine or masculine in orientation.
    Nontheless, I found the results kind of bizarre.
    Maybe it's a hint that gay men are EVIL???

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I think I will review those studies again.
     
  23. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    Anyhow, pertaining to the question I asked about the results of that:

    Could there possibly be some type of emotional state that influences a different ratio of hormones to be excreted in the sweat that is dependent on which gender you are attracted to, or which one you identify with?
     

Share This Page