- Thread starter barotti
- Start date
H
HOF
Guest
More importantly, are people born stupid?
El Fantasma
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2010
- Messages
- 159
HOF said:
HOF what the fuck is wrong with you?
More importantly, are people born troll?
JackassJack
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2010
- Messages
- 558
El Fantasma said:
Yea some people have extra gene, jackass gene.
H
HOF
Guest
barotti said:
Oh gee thanks, if it's so important for you to know, why not do your own research. There are arguments all over about choice or genetics, does it really matter?
T
Tgirl Nikki
Guest
I don't believe for a minute that you actually expect to answer that question here... you're just trying to stir up shit, and I hope everyone else is wise enough to realize it.
People are born people - what more do you need to know?
People are born people - what more do you need to know?
H
HOF
Guest
El Fantasma said:
Not wrong with me! How about you?
Tgirl Nikki said:I don't believe for a minute that you actually expect to answer that question here... you're just trying to stir up shit, and I hope everyone else is wise enough to realize it.
People are born people - what more do you need to know?
He is troll because you did not like the topic? How convenient....
Why don't you just post a civil answer? Something like " I think it's something in their mind that makes them gay or something like that"
H
HOF
Guest
barotti said:
Barotti, if I offended you, I apologize. What I believe is stupid is the question that you asked not you. Am I offended by your question? No. I do believe that your question was asked to create issues generally.
As much as you say don't read and reply, you can't control replies to your threads just as you can't control if people are born gay or not.
In this day and age, what does it really matter what someone's orientation is? It doesn't matter to the government, employers, schools. It only matters to religious institutions and those who are opposed.
You can certainly insinuate what you wish about me that's your opinion, and it doesn't matter to me.
- Thread starter
- #13
HOF said:
You can't control other people's post either. When you don't like it call it a stupid? This sound right to you? If so I have nothing to say.
What issue??? It is just a topic. It has been discussed on many forums without call it stupid. Just google it you will see how normal people discuss topics like this without throwing shit to each other. Well of course Mature people can discuss.
On the other hand Tgirl Nikki didn't like to topic and call me a troll. Very mature.
Are some people born gay?
By Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard Science is rapidly converging on the conclusion that sexual orientation is innate. It has found that homosexuals often act differently from heterosexuals in early childhood, before they have even heard of sex. A recent study by Simon LeVay, a neurobiologist at the Salk Institute, reported a difference in the hypothalamus, a part of the brain that develops at a young age, between homosexual and heterosexual men.
If true, a biological explanation is good news for homosexuals and their advocates.
Our own research has shown that male sexual orientation is substantially genetic. Over the last two years, we have studied the rates of homosexuality in identical and non-identical twin brothers of gay men, as well as adoptive brothers of gay men. Fifty-two percent of the identical twin brothers were gay, as against 22 percent of non-identical twins and 11 percent of the adoptive, genetically unrelated brothers.
In contrast, research on social factors has been fruitless. [
...rjw] Despite many attempts, there has been no clear demonstration that parental behavior, even a parent's homosexuality, affects children's sexual orientation. Cultures tolerant of homosexuals do not appear to raise more of them than do less permissive societies.
Homophobes sometimes justify their prejudice against homosexuals by alleging that homosexuality is contagious -- that young homosexuals become that way because of older homosexuals and that homosexuality is a social corruption. Such beliefs form the core of the organized anti-homosexual movement. If homosexuality is largely innate, this would prove that these claims are groundless.
Given these implications, it may seem surprising that the biological studies disturb many gay and lesbian advocates. Misunderstanding them, the advocates often suggest that the search for a biological cause is motivated by an assumption that homosexuality is an illness. Behavioral scientists, however, have long searched for biological underpinnings of traits such as extraversion and intelligence, which no one considers to be negative. Furthermore, a biological explanation of homosexuality simultaneously explains heterosexuality.
This leads to a more pertinent fear of gays and lesbians, that people will assume that answers to moral questions hinge on the results of scientific study. Should a benevolent view of homosexuality depend on the assumption that it is innate? Are gays and lesbians to be tolerated only if they are "born that way"?
Regardless of what causes sexual orientation, there is no plausible justification for oppressing homosexuals. Reasons that have long been offered -- that homosexuals disproportionately molest children, convert heterosexuals to homsexuality, are mentally ill, betray their country -- have been shown to be false.
But homophobia remains the one form of bigotry that respectable people can express in public. If the long-overdue national debate on homosexuality took place, the poverty of the anti-homosexual case would become readily apparent.
If scientific study of the origins of sexual orientation would not directly resolve the public issue, why do it?
First, in can inform public debate. But equally important is the value of discovery, particularly self-discovery. A gay man with a heterosexual identical twin, both of whom we studied, put it this way: "I accepted being gay years ago, so that's not why I want to know. But sexual orientation is such an important part of my life -- anyone's life -- that I'm still curious why I turned out gay and my brother straight." How could anyone not be curious? Michael Bailey is assistant professor of psychology at Northwestern University. Richard Pillard is associate professor of psychiatry at Boston University School of Medicine.
https://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/scotts/bulgarians/nature-nurture/bailey-pillard.html
By Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard Science is rapidly converging on the conclusion that sexual orientation is innate. It has found that homosexuals often act differently from heterosexuals in early childhood, before they have even heard of sex. A recent study by Simon LeVay, a neurobiologist at the Salk Institute, reported a difference in the hypothalamus, a part of the brain that develops at a young age, between homosexual and heterosexual men.
If true, a biological explanation is good news for homosexuals and their advocates.
Our own research has shown that male sexual orientation is substantially genetic. Over the last two years, we have studied the rates of homosexuality in identical and non-identical twin brothers of gay men, as well as adoptive brothers of gay men. Fifty-two percent of the identical twin brothers were gay, as against 22 percent of non-identical twins and 11 percent of the adoptive, genetically unrelated brothers.
In contrast, research on social factors has been fruitless. [
...rjw] Despite many attempts, there has been no clear demonstration that parental behavior, even a parent's homosexuality, affects children's sexual orientation. Cultures tolerant of homosexuals do not appear to raise more of them than do less permissive societies. Homophobes sometimes justify their prejudice against homosexuals by alleging that homosexuality is contagious -- that young homosexuals become that way because of older homosexuals and that homosexuality is a social corruption. Such beliefs form the core of the organized anti-homosexual movement. If homosexuality is largely innate, this would prove that these claims are groundless.
Given these implications, it may seem surprising that the biological studies disturb many gay and lesbian advocates. Misunderstanding them, the advocates often suggest that the search for a biological cause is motivated by an assumption that homosexuality is an illness. Behavioral scientists, however, have long searched for biological underpinnings of traits such as extraversion and intelligence, which no one considers to be negative. Furthermore, a biological explanation of homosexuality simultaneously explains heterosexuality.
This leads to a more pertinent fear of gays and lesbians, that people will assume that answers to moral questions hinge on the results of scientific study. Should a benevolent view of homosexuality depend on the assumption that it is innate? Are gays and lesbians to be tolerated only if they are "born that way"?
Regardless of what causes sexual orientation, there is no plausible justification for oppressing homosexuals. Reasons that have long been offered -- that homosexuals disproportionately molest children, convert heterosexuals to homsexuality, are mentally ill, betray their country -- have been shown to be false.
But homophobia remains the one form of bigotry that respectable people can express in public. If the long-overdue national debate on homosexuality took place, the poverty of the anti-homosexual case would become readily apparent.
If scientific study of the origins of sexual orientation would not directly resolve the public issue, why do it?
First, in can inform public debate. But equally important is the value of discovery, particularly self-discovery. A gay man with a heterosexual identical twin, both of whom we studied, put it this way: "I accepted being gay years ago, so that's not why I want to know. But sexual orientation is such an important part of my life -- anyone's life -- that I'm still curious why I turned out gay and my brother straight." How could anyone not be curious? Michael Bailey is assistant professor of psychology at Northwestern University. Richard Pillard is associate professor of psychiatry at Boston University School of Medicine.
https://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/scotts/bulgarians/nature-nurture/bailey-pillard.html
H
HOF
Guest
barotti said:
It's a topic that you have just said has been discussed on many forums and it's been beaten to death on many forums. Yes, I think the simple question that you posed is stupid because you just stated it's on various forms not that you're stupid. I think that you knew there would be varying opinions for you to argue with, and I have no concern or involvement what anyone else calls you. I didn't use the word troll. At any rate, I'm not to continue this bantering as it's not productive.
B
blissful
Guest
We are all born Gay.
The question should be: Are we born straight?
Brash and I talk about this. This is why the church was form to keep the population going. I feel most people are born this way. I could go on but it is only a theory.:tongue:
The question should be: Are we born straight?
Brash and I talk about this. This is why the church was form to keep the population going. I feel most people are born this way. I could go on but it is only a theory.:tongue:
Sorry Bliss, but the church was formed to give priests ready access to alter boys.....
I don't know the op's intentions but I see no problem with this post....at least it's more interesting than yet another picture thread full of bald beavers!!!
From that article, I dont' think gay or lesbians should be afraid of them finding the root cause of homosexuality. If it is genetic, it is no different than a gene that makes your hair brown, gives you big boobs, or a little dick.
I guess we'll find out when they finish mapping the human genome.
I think it might be genetic but also societal. In the sense that if one is raised in a liberal society where it is acceptable to experiment with both sexes, one might be more prone to "choose" a side. For example, I know some women prefer women because they are sick of the shit some men put them through.
I forget who it was, (someone relatively famous) who was brought up straight, married, had kids, and grew to middle age before "discovering" he was gay. He went on to explain that he thought there was something different about him from the start, but didn't know what it was. (btw, he was brought up in a strick catholic household). He was "taught" how to lead a life was to marry, have kids etc so that's what he did. I think he said he really wasn't exposed to anything homosexual until later in life so it was like he craved chocolate, but had never known chocolate or what chocolate was so he didn't know what he was missing.
I think one also has the ability to choose whether or not to act on those impulses. For eg: I'm pretty sure I could pick up a gay man and have sex with him but I choose not to simply because it turns my stomach lol. Just like I could go out and pick up a homely woman but I choose not to. Just because one is gay or straight, doesn't mean they MUST MUST MUST lead a gay or straight lifestyle.
Just like a full blown hardcore dike doesn't HAVE to go out and buy a harley, they could ride a honda. They don't HAVE to get a brush cut and get tats up and down their arms, they CHOOSE to.
I watched the HBO series The Real L word and there was one woman on there who was constantly trying to force her sexuality onto her mother. I couldn't help but think: what's the fucking big deal? I don't force my sexuality onto MY mother. Her mother visited her in LA and she was all up in arms (with her partner) about how they couldn't have any PDAs while she was around and they were upset about it. I know whenever I had a gf and I brought her around my family I certainly didn't make out with her in front of my parents or grab her ass or anything.
I couldn't and still can't figure out why she was so obsessed with forcing her sexuality onto her mother......
I don't know the op's intentions but I see no problem with this post....at least it's more interesting than yet another picture thread full of bald beavers!!!
From that article, I dont' think gay or lesbians should be afraid of them finding the root cause of homosexuality. If it is genetic, it is no different than a gene that makes your hair brown, gives you big boobs, or a little dick.
I guess we'll find out when they finish mapping the human genome.
I think it might be genetic but also societal. In the sense that if one is raised in a liberal society where it is acceptable to experiment with both sexes, one might be more prone to "choose" a side. For example, I know some women prefer women because they are sick of the shit some men put them through.
I forget who it was, (someone relatively famous) who was brought up straight, married, had kids, and grew to middle age before "discovering" he was gay. He went on to explain that he thought there was something different about him from the start, but didn't know what it was. (btw, he was brought up in a strick catholic household). He was "taught" how to lead a life was to marry, have kids etc so that's what he did. I think he said he really wasn't exposed to anything homosexual until later in life so it was like he craved chocolate, but had never known chocolate or what chocolate was so he didn't know what he was missing.
I think one also has the ability to choose whether or not to act on those impulses. For eg: I'm pretty sure I could pick up a gay man and have sex with him but I choose not to simply because it turns my stomach lol. Just like I could go out and pick up a homely woman but I choose not to. Just because one is gay or straight, doesn't mean they MUST MUST MUST lead a gay or straight lifestyle.
Just like a full blown hardcore dike doesn't HAVE to go out and buy a harley, they could ride a honda. They don't HAVE to get a brush cut and get tats up and down their arms, they CHOOSE to.
I watched the HBO series The Real L word and there was one woman on there who was constantly trying to force her sexuality onto her mother. I couldn't help but think: what's the fucking big deal? I don't force my sexuality onto MY mother. Her mother visited her in LA and she was all up in arms (with her partner) about how they couldn't have any PDAs while she was around and they were upset about it. I know whenever I had a gf and I brought her around my family I certainly didn't make out with her in front of my parents or grab her ass or anything.
I couldn't and still can't figure out why she was so obsessed with forcing her sexuality onto her mother......
If gayness is something we develop instead of being born with, that doesn't mean we choose it.
Does anyone choose who they are or the type of person they turn out to be?
Some people change later on, I believe they change their sexual preferences a few times in adulthood but not out of choice.
It's too bad we can't talk about this topic, but there isn't an openness or maturity that goes into respecting each other on a basic level. And that's just starting with me, lol.
HOF said:
I am confused. Are you the one who decides what to talk or not to talk around here? :neutral:
tboy said:
+1
Plus this topic is still an open to discussion, because there is no %100 proof yet whather it is a choice or it is in genes.
Blackrock13
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2010
- Messages
- 471
blissful said:
You're right it's only a theory. I've got a book that list 100+ other theories that would crack you up and then a tear to your eye when you realize there are people out there who believe them.
Similar threads
