Is homosexuality a genetic/inherited trait or a learned/chosen behavior & lifestyle? [Archive]

Wild i

05-23-2003, 01:19 PM

Originally posted by C.L.E.O:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Wild i:
100% genetic.

I have no problem with my orientation, but, honestly, it would be a lot easier to be part of the main stream. I don't thing most people would choose the harassment, self-doubt, possible family rejection, etc. etc. that comes with being true to self in this area. So Wild i you feel that the cause of an individual being attracted to and engaging in a relationship with someone of the same sex can be found in their DNA? [/QUOTE]Ummm, DNA. Well, I don't think I know enough about DNA to intelligently answer that question per se. However, I do believe we're "born this way." If DNA controls all of our traits, then, yes.

I've also noted that with the tens of thousands of gay people I've known, I've never known one who was the only one in a family.

RANDALL! HELP!

Cleo Khary

05-23-2003, 01:19 PM

Originally posted by Bold Soul:
The human sub-organism is a balanced thing. Each gender has elements of male and female. The potential for either is there. There is as much data for genetics as there are against - but there is no known "gay gene" as it were.

It would appear that "homosexuality as genetic trait" is a myth that has been developed in response to the draconian oppression of homosexuals in society. It's the "I know you don't like it, but I can't help it, so let me be" response.

Many homosexual human beings reject the genetics notion on the grounds that it is conciliatory in principal and comes off as an excuse for homosexuality. I tend to agree. This makes sense.

Wild i

05-23-2003, 01:20 PM

Originally posted by C.L.E.O:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bold Soul:
The human sub-organism is a balanced thing. Each gender has elements of male and female. The potential for either is there. There is as much data for genetics as there are against - but there is no known "gay gene" as it were.

It would appear that "homosexuality as genetic trait" is a myth that has been developed in response to the draconian oppression of homosexuals in society. It's the "I know you don't like it, but I can't help it, so let me be" response.

Many homosexual human beings reject the genetics notion on the grounds that it is conciliatory in principal and comes off as an excuse for homosexuality. I tend to agree. This makes sense. [/QUOTE]Yes it does...

Koffy Brown

05-23-2003, 01:23 PM

Cleo Khary

05-23-2003, 01:25 PM

Originally posted by Wild i:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by C.L.E.O:
[qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Wild i:
[qb] 100% genetic.

I've also noted that with the tens of thousands of gay people I've known, I've never known one who was the only one in a family.Well that is interesting Wild i because I think that further supports the learned behavior option moreso than the genetic option because the only to people that have the most direct influence on an individual genetically is mom and dad. So if uncle bob or cousin judy is gay and mom and dad aren't the genetic ties wouldn't seem to be strong or even existent.

Bold Soul

05-23-2003, 01:27 PM

One theory I have RELATED TO BIOLOGY is that homosexuality by nature is present in our species as a balancing of the human organism.

Current world culture enforces an edict to "be fruitful and multiply" that goes against the survival mechanism of human beings and, environmentally, encroaches upon the existence of other species.

Not every individual member of a species is compelled to mate and produce offspring. Every bird and be ain't ****in'. Every bird and bee doesn't "feel" the "need" to "have a baby".

Homosexuality may be natural, but it isn't genetic and it isn't right or wrong. It just is.

[ May 23, 2003, 02:28 PM: Message edited by: Bold Soul ]

Bold Soul

05-23-2003, 01:28 PM

Originally posted by Ashaki:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bold Soul:
The human sub-organism is a balanced thing. Each gender has elements of male and female. The potential for either is there. There is as much data for genetics as there are against - but there is no known "gay gene" as it were.

It would appear that "homosexuality as genetic trait" is a myth that has been developed in response to the draconian oppression of homosexuals in society. It's the "I know you don't like it, but I can't help it, so let me be" response.

Many homosexual human beings reject the genetics notion on the grounds that it is conciliatory in principal and comes off as an excuse for homosexuality. I tend to agree. nerd... :D [/QUOTE];)

Cleo Khary

05-23-2003, 01:38 PM

Originally posted by Bold Soul:
One theory I have RELATED TO MACROBIOLOGY is that homosexuality by nature is present in our species as a balancing of the human organism.
I have never heard of this theory Bold (which isn't sayin much ;) ) and I know that you didn't specifically claim to be a proponent of it but if one takes a look at this topic from a scientific/Darwinistic view one would find the homosexuality in not readily abundant in the animal kingdom. If we were to anthropomorphise animals, primates as an example, (as we usually do)we would not find a basis for this trait in the evolutionary sense. Humans may be the one of the only species that actively engages in homosexual acts.

Alanda Marquette from DiscoLadyLand

05-23-2003, 01:43 PM

Well,the couple of homosexuals that I knew personally growing up were molested by uncles or close family friends and they both told me of how afterwards they felt that they couldn't be with women because they had to be attracted to men because men were attracted to them. I cannot truly answer if it is genetic or not but I do have a cousin that is a lesbian because she told me that she never had the closeness of her mother or grandmother, she was molested at a young age, men used her all of her life, men are good for nothing, and women are just easier to accept her. graemlins/conf44.gif I just believe she just have some serious self esteem and trust issues.

D J 1 3 8

05-23-2003, 01:44 PM

Originally posted by C.L.E.O:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bold Soul:
One theory I have RELATED TO MACROBIOLOGY is that homosexuality by nature is present in our species as a balancing of the human organism.
I have never heard of this theory Bold (which isn't sayin much ;) ) and I know that you didn't specifically claim to be a proponent of it but if one takes a look at this topic from a scientific/Darwinistic view one would find the homosexuality in not readily abundant in the animal kingdom. If we were to anthropomorphise animals, primates as an example, (as we usually do)we would not find a basis for this trait in the evolutionary sense. Humans may be the one of the only species that actively engages in homosexual acts. [/QUOTE]Actually, primates are one of the only other known species that actually DO engage in homosexuality. It is rare, but there's a certain species, i think they're either chimps or baboons, that does do it. PBS had a whole show about this particular species once. They were strangeley sexually promiscuous, almost sexually ambiguous. This included a lot of monkey incest as well. Can't remember much more.

I would guess that the majority of homosexuality is genetic of some sort, but there is no denying the effects that sexual abuse can have on many children. Meaning, it is a fact that many sexually abused children do end up considering themselves homosexuals as adults. I am not condemning anybody, btw.

(edited for spelling...)

[ May 23, 2003, 02:48 PM: Message edited by: DJ 138 ]

darrow

05-23-2003, 01:45 PM

For those that identified it as "learned", could you explain what you mean?

Do you think homosexuals learn to be attracted (physically, emotionally, spiritually) to someone of the same sex?

If there is a learning process going on, who or what are the teachers?

Cleo Khary

05-23-2003, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by darrow:
For those that identified it as "learned", could you explain what you mean?

Do you think homosexuals learn to be attracted (physically, emotionally, spiritually) to someone of the same sex?

If there is a learning process going on, who or what are the teachers? read some of the post above darrow as many of them give examples of how this behavior might have the opportunity to be learned like seeing other family members engage in these practices and it being acceptable, or being molested and psychologically abused as a child (the most impressionable time of one's life), etc..

rob gregory

05-23-2003, 02:06 PM

And

05-23-2003, 02:13 PM

Interesting discussion. Just to be clear on some questions in my head. Has a gene responsible for preference/orientation whatever you want to call it, been discovered?

darrow

05-23-2003, 02:14 PM

Originally posted by C.L.E.O:
read some of the post above darrow as many of them give examples of how this behavior might have the opportunity to be learned like seeing other family members engage in these practices and it being acceptable, or being molested and psychologically abused as a child (the most impressionable time of one's life), etc.. Yep, I read the posts. I was hoping for even more clarification. smile.gif

If I'm to interpret the responses back, some are saying that gays learn to be gay by being exposed to traumatic events such as sexual abuse or psychological abuse. This reasoning, if worded differently is something like A caused B, isn't it?

So what about kids that get molested or psychologically abused, probaby experience trauma of some sort, but are not gay as adults? In that case, A happened, but B didn't.

Maybe A doesn't have anything to do with B? Or maybe it is simply a possible factor (instead of the causal factor) in shaping a person?

Maybe part of the challenge with this question is that the choices are presented as either or.

Also, I don't think learned and chosen should be lumped together. They are entirely different scenarios.

Alanda Marquette from DiscoLadyLand

05-23-2003, 02:20 PM

Okay now this discussion is getting to scientific. You cannot compare heteorsexuality to homosexuality because we were made to pro-create, period. Otherwise being male and female would be obselete don't you think? We are all different and all of us do not make the same choices. I am not gay-bashing or judging but we do not choose who we are, just what we do in this lifetime is what matter.

Alanda Marquette from DiscoLadyLand

05-23-2003, 02:23 PM

Originally posted by darrow:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by C.L.E.O:
read some of the post above darrow as many of them give examples of how this behavior might have the opportunity to be learned like seeing other family members engage in these practices and it being acceptable, or being molested and psychologically abused as a child (the most impressionable time of one's life), etc.. Yep, I read the posts. I was hoping for even more clarification. smile.gif

If I'm to interpret the responses back, some are saying that gays learn to be gay by being exposed to traumatic events such as sexual abuse or psychological abuse. This reasoning, if worded differently is something like A caused B, isn't it?

So what about kids that get molested or psychologically abused, probaby experience trauma of some sort, but are not gay as adults? In that case, A happened, but B didn't.

Maybe A doesn't have anything to do with B? Or maybe it is simply a possible factor (instead of the causal factor) in shaping a person?

Maybe part of the challenge with this question is that the choices are presented as either or.

Also, I don't think learned and chosen should be lumped together. They are entirely different scenarios. [/QUOTE]Being molested have a huge impact on adults period, Some turn out with personality disorders (mentally disturbed), prostitution or become very promiscuous. I used those people as examples and to why they felt they were gay, they felt it was learned so they chose to be that way.

rob gregory

05-23-2003, 02:24 PM

Originally posted by DiscoLady:
Okay now this discussion is getting to scientific. You cannot compare heteorsexuality to homosexuality because we were made to pro-create, period. Otherwise being male and female would be obselete don't you think? We are all different and all of us do not make the same choices. I am not gay-bashing or judging but we do not choose who we are, just what we do in this lifetime is what matter. We all don't have sex primarily for that reason. Sometimes procreation is a consequence rather than a purpose.

And

05-23-2003, 02:24 PM

Another question .. by gay is the implied meaning people who have sex with the same sex? What exactly do people understand gay to mean?

Alanda Marquette from DiscoLadyLand

05-23-2003, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DiscoLady:
Okay now this discussion is getting to scientific. You cannot compare heteorsexuality to homosexuality because we were made to pro-create, period. Otherwise being male and female would be obselete don't you think? We are all different and all of us do not make the same choices. I am not gay-bashing or judging but we do not choose who we are, just what we do in this lifetime is what matter. We all don't have sex primarily for that reason. Sometimes procreation is a consequence rather than a purpose. [/QUOTE]Rather if we have sex for that reason or not, our bodies were made to do it. Plain and simple. Just like we were made to eat to keep ourselves alive but there are alot of overweight people that eat because they love to eat, so I guess they were born that way too.

darrow

05-23-2003, 02:30 PM

Oh I definitely don't dispute the effects that those sort of events have on people...trust me on that one.

I think my point (which probably was not clear) is that to point to a single type of event as say that event is THE (as opposed to one of the many) reason for a person's sexuality is a stretch for me.

I'm always open to learn more though.

darrow

05-23-2003, 02:33 PM

Originally posted by DiscoLady:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DiscoLady:
Okay now this discussion is getting to scientific. You cannot compare heteorsexuality to homosexuality because we were made to pro-create, period. Otherwise being male and female would be obselete don't you think? We are all different and all of us do not make the same choices. I am not gay-bashing or judging but we do not choose who we are, just what we do in this lifetime is what matter. We all don't have sex primarily for that reason. Sometimes procreation is a consequence rather than a purpose. [/QUOTE]Rather if we have sex for that reason or not, our bodies were made to do it. Plain and simple. Just like we were made to eat to keep ourselves alive but there are alot of overweight people that eat because they love to eat, so I guess they were born that way too. [/QUOTE]I'm still not sure where you are going DiscoLady. It sounds like you are saying that being gay is a choice?

music

05-23-2003, 02:36 PM

it is a preference. god made man and woman as a mate for each other.

D J 1 3 8

05-23-2003, 02:40 PM

Originally posted by DiscoLady:
cannot compare heteorsexuality to homosexuality because we were made to pro-create, period. I don't understand this statement.

Humans have the ability to pro-create. We also have the ability to kill ourselves, but one wouldn't say we were MADE to kill ourselves. We have the ability for a multitude of things. Phrasing such as "we were made to procreate" implies a maker and a specific plan for us by that maker. Obviously, many people believe just that. Many others do not. Maybe this is not what you were getting at at all.

[ May 23, 2003, 03:41 PM: Message edited by: DJ 138 ]

And

05-23-2003, 02:45 PM

Originally posted by DJ 138:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DiscoLady:
cannot compare heteorsexuality to homosexuality because we were made to pro-create, period. I don't understand this statement.

Humans have the ability to pro-create. We also have the ability to kill ourselves, but one wouldn't say we were MADE to kill ourselves. We have the ability for a multitude of things. Phrasing such as "we were made to procreate" implies a maker and a specific plan for us by that maker. Obviously, many people believe just that. Many others do not. Maybe this is not what you were getting at at all. [/QUOTE]My sentiments too.

Huey P. Freeman

05-23-2003, 02:47 PM

Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bold Soul:
The human sub-organism is a balanced thing. Each gender has elements of male and female. The potential for either is there. There is as much data for genetics as there are against - but there is no known "gay gene" as it were.

It would appear that "homosexuality as genetic trait" is a myth that has been developed in response to the draconian oppression of homosexuals in society. It's the "I know you don't like it, but I can't help it, so let me be" response.

Many homosexual human beings reject the genetics notion on the grounds that it is conciliatory in principal and comes off as an excuse for homosexuality. I tend to agree. Bold,

Could the above description also apply to heterosexuality? It seems hetereosexual is considered the norm, hence,it doesn't come under scrutiny. [/QUOTE]The reason being that heterosexuality propogates the species.

And

05-23-2003, 02:47 PM

Originally posted by music:
it is a preference. god made man and woman as a mate for each other. Which god would that be?
and if a person is "gay" and doesn't believe in your god and the Adam + Eve theory then what?

Huey P. Freeman

05-23-2003, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DiscoLady:
Okay now this discussion is getting to scientific. You cannot compare heteorsexuality to homosexuality because we were made to pro-create, period. Otherwise being male and female would be obselete don't you think? We are all different and all of us do not make the same choices. I am not gay-bashing or judging but we do not choose who we are, just what we do in this lifetime is what matter. We all don't have sex primarily for that reason. Sometimes procreation is a consequence rather than a purpose. [/QUOTE]But without heterosexual sex you, I, all straight, bi, and gay people would not exist. So what you are saying does not make much sense.

rob gregory

05-23-2003, 02:57 PM

Originally posted by Eargasm:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DiscoLady:
Okay now this discussion is getting to scientific. You cannot compare heteorsexuality to homosexuality because we were made to pro-create, period. Otherwise being male and female would be obselete don't you think? We are all different and all of us do not make the same choices. I am not gay-bashing or judging but we do not choose who we are, just what we do in this lifetime is what matter. We all don't have sex primarily for that reason. Sometimes procreation is a consequence rather than a purpose. [/QUOTE]But without heterosexual sex you, I, all straight, bi, and gay people would not exist. So what you are saying does not make much sense. [/QUOTE]It makes sense if we are talking about sex and not procreation. You can have one without the other.

darrow

05-23-2003, 02:57 PM

Originally posted by music:
it is a preference. god made man and woman as a mate for each other. by preference, do you mean it is a choice?

floorgasm

05-23-2003, 03:02 PM

i think it's beyond biology. there's a natural predisposition, for sure, but the way it's nurtured and explored goes further than pure nature. i see it as a social evolution.

Huey P. Freeman

05-23-2003, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Eargasm:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DiscoLady:
Okay now this discussion is getting to scientific. You cannot compare heteorsexuality to homosexuality because we were made to pro-create, period. Otherwise being male and female would be obselete don't you think? We are all different and all of us do not make the same choices. I am not gay-bashing or judging but we do not choose who we are, just what we do in this lifetime is what matter. We all don't have sex primarily for that reason. Sometimes procreation is a consequence rather than a purpose. [/QUOTE]But without heterosexual sex you, I, all straight, bi, and gay people would not exist. So what you are saying does not make much sense. [/QUOTE]It makes sense if we are talking about sex and not procreation. You can have one without the other. [/QUOTE]Not true. You can have sex without procreation but until the last half century you could NOT have had procreation without sex. If at some point in human history heterosexuality disappeared so would ave humanity. I'm not judging anything rest assured. I won't begin to offer an opinion on genetic/learned cause I truly have no clue. If you are gay or straight is your business. But again your statement did not make any sense.

darrow

05-23-2003, 03:08 PM

What do you need to be called a homosexual?

1) same-sex orientation but do not actual engage in the physical act?
2) having sex with someone of the same sex?
3) 1 and 2?

Can you be a homosexual and just have trait number 1?

Same question as previous but just have trait number 2?

Is it possible that number 2 is a choice but number 1 isn't?

i have other questions, but I'm going home now.

have a good weekend!

rob gregory

05-23-2003, 03:11 PM

Originally posted by darrow:
What do you need to be called a homosexual?

1) same-sex orientation but do not actual engage in the physical act?
2) having sex with someone of the same sex?
3) 1 and 2?

Can you be a homosexual and just have trait number 1?

Same question as previous but just have trait number 2?

Is it possible that number 2 is a choice but number 1 isn't?

i have other questions, but I'm going home now.

have a good weekend! Good points.

Does a gay virgin exist?

Alanda Marquette from DiscoLadyLand

05-23-2003, 03:27 PM

Originally posted by music:
it is a preference. god made man and woman as a mate for each other. Thank you for interpreting what I was trying to say.

M3taPhsX

05-23-2003, 03:27 PM

It believe it is a combination of both genetics and social factors. I believe people are born with certain gene(s) that could make them more suseptible to being gay but because of their enivornment,when growing up, will determine where they will fall on the gay straight spectrum.

[ May 23, 2003, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: M3taPhsX ]

rob gregory

05-23-2003, 03:33 PM

Originally posted by DiscoLady:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by music:
it is a preference. god made man and woman as a mate for each other. Thank you for interpreting what I was trying to say. [/QUOTE]It's a preference to homosexual but not heterosexual?

[ May 23, 2003, 04:35 PM: Message edited by: PhoreAyem ]

Friday

05-23-2003, 03:35 PM

Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
Does a gay virgin exist? Ova here!!.....I swear, I am a gay man trapped in a woman's body graemlins/mecry.gif :rolleyes: hmmm...maybe that is why I can't get a date...better read me some Cosmopolitain. icon_rofl.gif

Huey P. Freeman

05-23-2003, 03:35 PM

Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by darrow:
What do you need to be called a homosexual?

1) same-sex orientation but do not actual engage in the physical act?
2) having sex with someone of the same sex?
3) 1 and 2?

Can you be a homosexual and just have trait number 1?

I knew a guy once who said that he was gay but also was deeply religious, as was his family, and that he would not sleep with men.
Same question as previous but just have trait number 2?

Is it possible that number 2 is a choice but number 1 isn't?

i have other questions, but I'm going home now.

have a good weekend! Good points.

Does a gay virgin exist? [/QUOTE]

rob gregory

05-23-2003, 03:38 PM

Originally posted by girlfriday:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
Does a gay virgin exist? Ova here!!.....I swear, I am a gay man trapped in a woman's body graemlins/mecry.gif :rolleyes: hmmm...maybe that is why I can't get a date...better read me some Cosmopolitain. icon_rofl.gif [/QUOTE]graemlins/rofl.gif

kara

05-23-2003, 03:38 PM

why does it matter if its genetic or learned?

rob gregory

05-23-2003, 03:41 PM

kara

05-23-2003, 03:42 PM

Originally posted by kara:
why does it matter if its genetic or learned? BUMP

Alanda Marquette from DiscoLadyLand

05-23-2003, 03:43 PM

Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DiscoLady:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by music:
it is a preference. god made man and woman as a mate for each other. Thank you for interpreting what I was trying to say. [/QUOTE]So due to biology, you're born hetero, but at some point choose to be homo? [/QUOTE]Okay, I didn't want to go there but here I am. Yes, according to biology and creation by God we are born hetero but choose to go different routes. Or have certain things born in us to choose differently. God gave us the right to choice so whatever choice we make is up to us. Please do not twist this, I am not saying that being gay is a choice but some choose to change because they feel it's not right and fear what people may think.

When it is all said and done God will have the last say period.

Friday

05-23-2003, 03:43 PM

Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by girlfriday:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
Does a gay virgin exist? Ova here!!.....I swear, I am a gay man trapped in a woman's body graemlins/mecry.gif :rolleyes: hmmm...maybe that is why I can't get a date...better read me some Cosmopolitain. icon_rofl.gif [/QUOTE]graemlins/rofl.gif [/QUOTE]I kid you not.....ya'll need to be explainin' that one to me ;) graemlins/rofl.gif

rob gregory

05-23-2003, 03:44 PM

Originally posted by kara:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kara:
why does it matter if its genetic or learned? BUMP [/QUOTE]It really doesn't.

Bold Soul

05-23-2003, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bold Soul:
The human sub-organism is a balanced thing. Each gender has elements of male and female. The potential for either is there. There is as much data for genetics as there are against - but there is no known "gay gene" as it were.

It would appear that "homosexuality as genetic trait" is a myth that has been developed in response to the draconian oppression of homosexuals in society. It's the "I know you don't like it, but I can't help it, so let me be" response.

Many homosexual human beings reject the genetics notion on the grounds that it is conciliatory in principal and comes off as an excuse for homosexuality. I tend to agree. Bold,

Could the above description also apply to heterosexuality? It seems hetereosexual is considered the norm, hence,it doesn't come under scrutiny. [/QUOTE]Indeed, I would consider that an accurate possibility. I just provided my answer in a societal context.

Bold Soul

05-23-2003, 03:51 PM

Originally posted by DiscoLady:
Okay now this discussion is getting to scientific.How can it get too scientific if the subject of the conversation is SCIENCE?

darrow

05-23-2003, 03:51 PM

Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kara:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kara:
why does it matter if its genetic or learned? BUMP [/QUOTE]It really doesn't. [/QUOTE]I couldn't resist getting back on this thread. I think it matters a big deal in different ways depending on who you talk to.

For instance, look at the issue of gay rights...depending on what is finally discovered (if anything is discovered) policy regarding things like medical benefits, legal rights,etc. could be directly affected by what may ultimately be determined.

Findings could also shape social perceptions over the long long term regarding homosexuality.

kara

05-23-2003, 03:51 PM

im asking b/c from the research and discussion ive read, there are the 2 sides, and then there are those who choose to reject the question

the ones who've argued its genetics seeming to bring an 'excuse' for what does not need to be excused, the ones claiming its learned doing so they can try to 'cure it'

many homosexuals just choose to reject the question ... since neither side answers the question

i am aware of a couple of books that are relevant you might find interesting. the first and best is "Science and Homosexualities" edited by Vernon Rosario (1997, Routledge). another book you might like is "The Gay Gene" (the author's name eludes me) that reports on a lot of data that its author believes supports his view that homosexuality is a genetic phenomenon.

Bold Soul

05-23-2003, 03:56 PM

Originally posted by Eargasm:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bold Soul:
The human sub-organism is a balanced thing. Each gender has elements of male and female. The potential for either is there. There is as much data for genetics as there are against - but there is no known "gay gene" as it were.

It would appear that "homosexuality as genetic trait" is a myth that has been developed in response to the draconian oppression of homosexuals in society. It's the "I know you don't like it, but I can't help it, so let me be" response.

Many homosexual human beings reject the genetics notion on the grounds that it is conciliatory in principal and comes off as an excuse for homosexuality. I tend to agree. Bold,

Could the above description also apply to heterosexuality? It seems hetereosexual is considered the norm, hence,it doesn't come under scrutiny. [/QUOTE]The reason being that heterosexuality propogates the species. [/QUOTE]Sex became politicized as the means of "God's command" to procreate - and those who lead/control the people in the name of "God" used this as a means of societal control.

Heterosexuality and procreation are not one in the same - nor does sexuality have anything to do with procreation unless an act of choice occurs.

Bold Soul

05-23-2003, 03:58 PM

Originally posted by darrow:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kara:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kara:
why does it matter if its genetic or learned? BUMP [/QUOTE]It really doesn't. [/QUOTE]I couldn't resist getting back on this thread. I think it matters a big deal in different ways depending on who you talk to.

For instance, look at the issue of gay rights...depending on what is finally discovered (if anything is discovered) policy regarding things like medical benefits, legal rights,etc. could be directly affected by what may ultimately be determined.

Findings could also shape social perceptions over the long long term regarding homosexuality. [/QUOTE]Darrow - anyone can hire a team of biologists and geneticists to develop whatever background required to prove a point. That people who maintain the arguement either way always come back with more theories to disprove the most recent theory of the opposition shows POLITICS AT WORK.

The issue is not biological. It is PHILOSOPHICAL.

kara

05-23-2003, 03:58 PM

darrow -

you seem to believe that if homosexuality was proven genetic, there would be no reason to discriminate

its a fallacious argument, that reason can defeat discrimination ... implying that discrimination is based on reason, that its reasonable.

it also seems to imply that since a genetic cause would make discrimination unreasonable, OTHER reasons would be justified ... again, wrong

hates not reasoned
bias is not fair

the cause of sexuality is irrelevant, if you believe there is nothing wrong with homosexuality smile.gif

(above are some thoughts of others i used but i agree with ..)

music

05-23-2003, 04:00 PM

i believe god destroyed a land because of the people's sexual preferences.

Friday

05-23-2003, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by Bold Soul:
Heterosexuality and procreation are not one in the same - nor does sexuality have anything to do with procreation unless an act of choice occurs. Nor is homosexuality and procreation.

All procreation is, is the union of a sperm and an egg. Not the act. In today's reality a woman does not need a man to procreate due to technology.

The act itself depends on what your preferred attraction is (choice)....male or female. Some people like sex with the opposite sex, some like it with the same sex.

[ May 23, 2003, 05:06 PM: Message edited by: girlfriday ]

rob gregory

05-23-2003, 04:09 PM

Originally posted by darrow:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kara:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kara:
why does it matter if its genetic or learned? BUMP [/QUOTE]It really doesn't. [/QUOTE]I couldn't resist getting back on this thread. I think it matters a big deal in different ways depending on who you talk to.

For instance, look at the issue of gay rights...depending on what is finally discovered (if anything is discovered) policy regarding things like medical benefits, legal rights,etc. could be directly affected by what may ultimately be determined.

How so? Do people have to prove they are gay? Those institutions who are "sensitive" to gays do on the strength of them saying so.

Findings could also shape social perceptions over the long long term regarding homosexuality. [/QUOTE]True.

If there is a "gay gene" do you think the straight public would be more synpathetic? It's almost like saying, "Cut him some slack, he can help because he has(insert genetic based diease).

kara

05-23-2003, 04:10 PM

damn, if sexuality was MY choice, id choose to be a lesbian

smile.gif

darrow

05-23-2003, 04:11 PM

Originally posted by kara:
darrow -

you seem to believe that if homosexuality was proven genetic, there would be no reason to discriminate

its a fallacious argument, that reason can defeat discrimination ... implying that discrimination is based on reason, that its reasonable.

it also seems to imply that since a genetic cause would make discrimination unreasonable, OTHER reasons would be justified ... again, wrong

hates not reasoned
bias is not fair

the cause of sexuality is irrelevant, if you believe there is nothing wrong with homosexuality smile.gif

(above are some thoughts of others i used but i agree with ..) Nope...you got me wrong kara. I never stated any such thing. People will ofcourse find reasons to discriminate often BECAUSE of genetics.

My statement wasn't even about just discrimination. A discovery that sexuality is either genetic or choice could have affects on all types of things...

I can imagine a lobbyist having an easier time lobbying a point based on what is ultimately discovered.

I can imagine a mental health worker approaching counseling and treatment differently based on what is discovered

I can imagine SOME companies deciding to offer or deny partner benefits based on what is discovered

I'm not sure why you would find it odd that a new perspective on something which we (americans) devote so much time to would have a big affect on many different things. Whether that reaction is reasonable or not is another thing.

kara

05-23-2003, 04:11 PM

...

[ May 23, 2003, 05:11 PM: Message edited by: kara ]

Friday

05-23-2003, 04:15 PM

Originally posted by girlfriday:
All procreation is, is the union of a sperm and an egg. Not the act. In today's reality a woman does not need a man to procreate due to technology. And when I say a woman does not need a man, I meant in the physical sense ;) porn and a cup will do just fine. :D

kara

05-23-2003, 04:15 PM

im saying that the need to justify homosexuality is what i find odd ... because ive experienced it primarily from people who are trying to prove it one way or the other for the reasons i said earlier ... this reasons you said it would be beneficial to know, are things i identified as rooted in discrimination (i.e. that policy does not afford gay couples certain things, etc ..)

no one asks if heterosexuality is learned or genetic .. i just fail to see the need ... there also should be equal access to the isseus you described for all people, regardless if the reason they are the way they are is b/c of science or learned

smile.gif

thats what i meant ...

[ May 23, 2003, 05:17 PM: Message edited by: kara ]

Friday

05-23-2003, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by kara:
no one asks if heterosexuality is learned or genetic .. YES! Let's ask that one

rob gregory

05-23-2003, 04:18 PM

Originally posted by girlfriday:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kara:
no one asks if heterosexuality is learned or genetic .. YES! Let's ask that one [/QUOTE]We'd be engaging in the same discussion.

Friday

05-23-2003, 04:21 PM

Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by girlfriday:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kara:
no one asks if heterosexuality is learned or genetic .. YES! Let's ask that one [/QUOTE]We'd be engaging in the same discussion. [/QUOTE]This is true, but what fun it would be to really dissect why we are hetrosexual...is it learned (conditioning..ie: pink & blue) or is it genetics. ;) At least most of us would be discussing a topic we have experienced.

kara

05-23-2003, 04:23 PM

but we dont ... because theres no need to decide heterosexuality's roots. we are afforded all privileges for our 'mainstream' sexual preference

so we never are asked to decide this. i advocate the same freedom for homosexuals, the freedom to just be w/out having to explain why

MYOR

05-23-2003, 04:23 PM

May I ask all of you. Have you ever, in grammer school... met someone that you knew was gay... because I don't think a child learns to be gay.. they just simply are...

JMNYC

05-23-2003, 04:29 PM

Procreation WAS, centuries ago, one of the only guarantors of the continuation of the human race. Are we not in fact at a point of overpopulation where procreation in many ways is working against the continuation of the human race?

The "Kinsey Scale" is representative of the degrees of sexuality within the human race and indicates that 80% of people have some degree of activity and/or interest during their lifetime that could be called "homosexual".

Being open to homosexuality is about allowing yourself to freely love someone of the same sex, whether inclusive or exclusive of sexual relations - freely without fear of reprisal by this judgemental society.

I know lots of men who have sex with other men but don't identify as "homosexual". No one would choose to identify as "gay". That would be like choosing to be obese - in this judgemental world, why would you choose to do something for which you will be ostracized for?

I firmly believe that we are pretty much all born try-sexual, meaning that we're open to try different things and that our experiences and attractions and schooling and upbringing and religious indoctrinations help to determine our behavior throughout the rest of our lives.

Sex feels good. Gay sex and straight sex both feel good - although there are different power aspects to them sometimes. But in the end, I don't agree that homosexuality is a genetic thing - I believe that in fact, homosexual behavior is quite natural as a way of physical interaction between two human beings... we LEARN or CHOOSE to judge those feelings as negative because of our upbringings or indoctrinations and therefore it is those who define their sexuality so narrowly that have in fact "learned or chosen a behavior & lifestyle".

The freedom of homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom backs up my point.

Free your mind, and the rest will follow.

[ May 23, 2003, 05:30 PM: Message edited by: JMNYC ]

Huey P. Freeman

05-23-2003, 04:31 PM

Originally posted by Bold Soul:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Eargasm:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bold Soul:
The human sub-organism is a balanced thing. Each gender has elements of male and female. The potential for either is there. There is as much data for genetics as there are against - but there is no known "gay gene" as it were.

It would appear that "homosexuality as genetic trait" is a myth that has been developed in response to the draconian oppression of homosexuals in society. It's the "I know you don't like it, but I can't help it, so let me be" response.

Many homosexual human beings reject the genetics notion on the grounds that it is conciliatory in principal and comes off as an excuse for homosexuality. I tend to agree. Bold,

Could the above description also apply to heterosexuality? It seems hetereosexual is considered the norm, hence,it doesn't come under scrutiny. [/QUOTE]The reason being that heterosexuality propogates the species. [/QUOTE]Sex became politicized as the means of "God's command" to procreate - and those who lead/control the people in the name of "God" used this as a means of societal control.

Heterosexuality and procreation are not one in the same - nor does sexuality have anything to do with procreation unless an act of choice occurs. [/QUOTE]Other than scientific means that came about in the last half century what other means of procreation are there? Magic? Prayer? Again you are not making sense.

JMNYC

05-23-2003, 04:33 PM

Originally posted by MYOR:
May I ask all of you. Have you ever, in grammer school... met someone that you knew was gay... because I don't think a child learns to be gay.. they just simply are... MYOR, on that point, I believe that some kids are taught to change their behavior because it is deemed as "gay" behavior. These are the ones who are more free thinking kids and we allow religious bullshit and political nonsense to stifle them. Then we wonder why they end up serial killers. graemlins/jpshakehead.gif

The kids you see as "gay" when they're young are the ones who are NOT taught to try to be something other than who they are. Maybe they end up sleeping with their own sex, maybe not. I know plenty of effeminate heterosexuals and plenty of butch homos.

Friday

05-23-2003, 04:35 PM

Originally posted by JMNYC:
I firmly believe that we are pretty much all born try-sexual, meaning that we're open to try different things and that our experiences and attractions and schooling and upbringing and religious indoctrinations help to determine our behavior throughout the rest of our lives.
Yes conditioning.....I love what you wrote. :D

MYOR

05-23-2003, 04:37 PM

Originally posted by JMNYC:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MYOR:
May I ask all of you. Have you ever, in grammer school... met someone that you knew was gay... because I don't think a child learns to be gay.. they just simply are... MYOR, on that point, I believe that some kids are taught to change their behavior because it is deemed as "gay" behavior. These are the ones who are more free thinking kids and we allow religious bullshit and political nonsense to stifle them. Then we wonder why they end up serial killers. graemlins/jpshakehead.gif

The kids you see as "gay" when they're young are the ones who are NOT taught to try to be something other than who they are. Maybe they end up sleeping with their own sex, maybe not. I know plenty of effeminate heterosexuals and plenty of butch homos. [/QUOTE]Another question... How many of you actually have gay friends., in which you have discussed with them their homosexuality??

And "God" made man and woman but he also made homapherdites(sp?).

Also are you arware that every human is first female...

[ May 23, 2003, 05:42 PM: Message edited by: MYOR ]

JMNYC

05-23-2003, 04:47 PM

Originally posted by MYOR:
Also are you arware that every human is first female... Hello!!!! Great point.

I am not trying to be shady here, but to those who take anything literally in a book that's been translated roughly by humans who each had their own interests over the course of thousands of years, WAKE UP! GOD is REAL, but you CANNOT rely on someone else's interpretation of his word to define how you're supposed to live. That's what got us into this mess we live in in the first place.

If you are "straight" and have ever used birth control, had a one-night (or one week-) stand, had oral sex, etc., then you are just as much of a SINNER according to ORGANIZED RELIGION as any d!ck-suckin homo - how you gonna procreate through ya tonsils? Again, I say, WAKE UP!

"LOVE is God". If you have a relationship with a MAN or a WOMAN and it is based on LOVE then you are on the right path.

Wild i

05-23-2003, 04:57 PM

Okay, responding to page one...

As a rule, I don't think molestation determines homosexuality. Approximately 99% of the women I know, gay and straight, have been molested to some greater or lesser degree in their lives. It might be overly friendly touching or it might be out-and-out rape, but almost all of them have some horror story to tell.

Conversely, few of the men I know -- again, gay or straight -- have reported molestation (and it may just be in the reporting, not in the actual events). Similarly, most of the guys with whom I've had the opportunity to get really intimate emotionally have reported some contact that would be considered "gay" but which I see as just experimentation in growing up.

Let me also say that I think there are different "types" or "levels" of gayness, if you will. I have at least one friend who was in a lesbian relationship for several years, but was not so involved before or since. In her case, I think it was more of a matter of hero worship of that particular older woman, who was gay. She wanted to please her, so she did what she thought would please her. They remain good friends to this very day, 30 years, 2 marriages and 2 kids later. One the other hand, we've all heard of people who played it "straight" for years, building marriages and families that were outwardly happy and stable, but later in life came out to the world and, most importantly, to themselves.

As for the need for procreation, being gay does not prevent procreation, even without science. Gay people have had children for years both within "straight" relationships and "gay" relationships. To say nothing of "open" relationships.

Finally, as for the animal kingdom, I have no documentation, I've done no study, but I have seen many, many animals engage in "homosexual" behavior.

Okay, on to page two...

Huey P. Freeman

05-23-2003, 05:01 PM

Originally posted by JMNYC:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MYOR:
[qb]Also are you arware that every human is first female... Hello!!!! Great point.

WRONG... Your sex is determined on a genetic level. Ever heard of x and y chromosomes. Thats what determines your sex. So while every human is born without sex organs your sex is already determined.

Wild i

05-23-2003, 05:06 PM

Okay, with regard to mass homosexuality meaning the end of the earth, not likely. This ol' world is pretty orderly. A certain percentage of people are born handicapped, diseased, only a certain number make it to adulthood and only some procreate -- gay or straight.

Ten percent has been a consistent ratio of gays to straights in the world since it's been calculated, so it's unlikely that gays will tip the balance of population.

As far as the God mandate, I don't pretend to be able to interpret God's (anybody's God, although I personally believe there's just one) plan, so I won't even address it.

Page three (maybe tommorrow. The whole world just came through my door).

Wild i

05-23-2003, 05:08 PM

Originally posted by Eargasm:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JMNYC:

Originally posted by MYOR:
[qb]Also are you arware that every human is first female... Hello!!!! Great point.

WRONG... Your sex is determined on a genetic level. Ever heard of x and y chromosomes. Thats what determines your sex. So while every human is born without sex organs your sex is already determined. Okay, I'm skipping, but you're wrong Eargasm. That chromosomal difference is not determined until the end of the first or beginning of the second trimester.

Huey P. Freeman

05-23-2003, 05:17 PM

Originally posted by Wild i:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Eargasm:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JMNYC:

Originally posted by MYOR:
[qb]Also are you arware that every human is first female... Hello!!!! Great point.

WRONG... Your sex is determined on a genetic level. Ever heard of x and y chromosomes. Thats what determines your sex. So while every human is born without sex organs your sex is already determined. Okay, I'm skipping, but you're wrong Eargasm. That chromosomal difference is not determined until the end of the first or beginning of the second trimester. [/QUOTE]Wrong.... All female eggs carry y chromosomes. Male sperm carry EITHER an x or y chromosome. The one that fertalizes the egg has one or the other. YY=Female XY=Male. Someone fell asleep in biology class and it wasn't me.

Huey P. Freeman

05-23-2003, 05:18 PM

The fetus grows it's sex organ in the second trimester BTW.

MYOR

05-23-2003, 06:16 PM

Originally posted by Eargasm:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Wild i:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Eargasm:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JMNYC:

Originally posted by MYOR:
[qb]Also are you arware that every human is first female... Hello!!!! Great point.

WRONG... Your sex is determined on a genetic level. Ever heard of x and y chromosomes. Thats what determines your sex. So while every human is born without sex organs your sex is already determined. Okay, I'm skipping, but you're wrong Eargasm. That chromosomal difference is not determined until the end of the first or beginning of the second trimester. [/QUOTE]Wrong.... All female eggs carry y chromosomes. Male sperm carry EITHER an x or y chromosome. The one that fertalizes the egg has one or the other. YY=Female XY=Male. Someone fell asleep in biology class and it wasn't me. [/QUOTE]Chromosomes are long lengths of up to 1500 genes, parcelled together by proteins. But it is the Y chromosome that carries the single gene that triggers the whole intricate process of turning a female foetus into a male. Building a boy is a complicated business that requires the cooperation of hundreds of genes — sorry boys, all foetuses are female for the first six weeks! Once triggered, a coalition of male building genes on the Y leap into action. Many Y genes are highly specific and are only active in building and maintaining the male sex organs.

And

05-23-2003, 06:23 PM

Interesting ...
This should make the saying "Stop acting like a girl" obsolote. Heh, heh.

kara

05-23-2003, 07:00 PM

Approximately 99% of the women I know, gay and straight, have been molested to some greater or lesser degree in their lives. It might be overly friendly touching or it might be out-and-out rape, but almost all of them have some horror story to tell.

that is sooooooooo true .. and so sad

Huey P. Freeman

05-23-2003, 07:11 PM

Originally posted by MYOR:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Eargasm:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Wild i:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Eargasm:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JMNYC:

Originally posted by MYOR:
[qb]Also are you arware that every human is first female... Hello!!!! Great point.

WRONG... Your sex is determined on a genetic level. Ever heard of x and y chromosomes. Thats what determines your sex. So while every human is born without sex organs your sex is already determined. Okay, I'm skipping, but you're wrong Eargasm. That chromosomal difference is not determined until the end of the first or beginning of the second trimester. [/QUOTE]Wrong.... All female eggs carry y chromosomes. Male sperm carry EITHER an x or y chromosome. The one that fertalizes the egg has one or the other. YY=Female XY=Male. Someone fell asleep in biology class and it wasn't me. [/QUOTE]Chromosomes are long lengths of up to 1500 genes, parcelled together by proteins. But it is the Y chromosome that carries the single gene that triggers the whole intricate process of turning a female foetus into a male. Building a boy is a complicated business that requires the cooperation of hundreds of genes — sorry boys, all foetuses are female for the first six weeks! Once triggered, a coalition of male building genes on the Y leap into action. Many Y genes are highly specific and are only active in building and maintaining the male sex organs. [/QUOTE]Actually after checking into it I had it backwords X chromosome are in the egg and sperm carry x and y. XX=girl XY=boy. A fetus sex is determined at the time of conception by the pairing of these chromosomes. And the "fact" that you are saying about all feti being female is a myth. An unproven hypothisis that some scientist once beleived. To date the it is generally accepted that the fetus is androgenous (SP?). The chemical changes that you speak of does happen about day 27 of gestation. That is when the feti begin to grow their sex organs.

Wild i

05-23-2003, 07:39 PM

Originally posted by Eargasm:
Actually after checking into it I had it backwords X chromosome are in the egg and sperm carry x and y. XX=girl XY=boy. A fetus sex is determined at the time of conception by the pairing of these chromosomes. And the "fact" that you are saying about all feti being female is a myth. An unproven hypothisis that some scientist once beleived. To date the it is generally accepted that the fetus is androgenous (SP?). The chemical changes that you speak of does happen about day 27 of gestation. That is when the feti begin to grow their sex organs. [/QB][/QUOTE]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~
Ear, I'm a little confused now. I understand the whole XY thing, but on the one hand you're saying the determination happens at conception, while on the other hand you say that it happens at day 27.

All I know is what I see on the discovery channel, and they said maleness is determined "later in the day" so to speak.

[ May 23, 2003, 08:48 PM: Message edited by: Wild i ]

Wild i

05-23-2003, 07:46 PM

Overall I have to stand in the corner with those who ask why justification is needed, even though I know some of the reasons.

The unfortunate reality is that humans, with our limited understanding, do seem to need to parse everything to try to make sense of it.

This is what I know:

I'm gay. I used to engage in straight behaviors (for the first 22 years of my life, in fact), but I don't think I was ever straight. Being gay feels as natural to me as being straight feels to 90% of the world. I do not feel God's damnation, but I sure as heck have felt man's on occasion. I have at least as many straight friends as gay and I love them all.

Treat me right and I will treat you right, whether your a homo or a breeder.

JMNYC

05-23-2003, 07:53 PM

Originally posted by Wild i:
Overall I have to stand in the corner with those who ask why justification is needed, even though I know some of the reasons.

The unfortunate reality is that humans, with our limited understanding, do seem to need to parse everything to try to make sense of it.

This is what I know:

I'm gay. I used to engage in straight behaviors (for the first 22 years of my life, in fact), but I don't think I was ever straight. Being gay feels as natural to me as being straight feels to 90% of the world. I do not feel God's damnation, but I sure as heck have felt man's on occasion. I have at least as many straight friends as gay and I love them all.

Treat me right and I will treat you right, whether your a homo or a breeder. Wild i, I may be stating the obvious, but you and I share a lot in common.

Whoever and whatever we are comes naturally, if we let it.

05-23-2003, 08:12 PM

IMO it's genetic.

Cleo Khary

05-23-2003, 09:30 PM

Originally posted by darrow:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kara:
darrow -

you seem to believe that if homosexuality was proven genetic, there would be no reason to discriminate

its a fallacious argument, that reason can defeat discrimination ... implying that discrimination is based on reason, that its reasonable.

it also seems to imply that since a genetic cause would make discrimination unreasonable, OTHER reasons would be justified ... again, wrong

hates not reasoned
bias is not fair

the cause of sexuality is irrelevant, if you believe there is nothing wrong with homosexuality smile.gif

(above are some thoughts of others i used but i agree with ..) Nope...you got me wrong kara. I never stated any such thing. People will ofcourse find reasons to discriminate often BECAUSE of genetics.

My statement wasn't even about just discrimination. A discovery that sexuality is either genetic or choice could have affects on all types of things...

I can imagine a lobbyist having an easier time lobbying a point based on what is ultimately discovered.

I can imagine a mental health worker approaching counseling and treatment differently based on what is discovered

I can imagine SOME companies deciding to offer or deny partner benefits based on what is discovered

I'm not sure why you would find it odd that a new perspective on something which we (americans) devote so much time to would have a big affect on many different things. Whether that reaction is reasonable or not is another thing. [/QUOTE]You are making a lot of sense here darrow
graemlins/acclaim.gif

Cleo Khary

05-23-2003, 09:38 PM

Originally posted by kara:
but we dont ... because theres no need to decide heterosexuality's roots. we are afforded all privileges for our 'mainstream' sexual preference

so we never are asked to decide this. i advocate the same freedom for homosexuals, the freedom to just be w/out having to explain why with all do respect kara denying or avoiding the issue will not make it go away. I could be wrong but the tone of your posts seem to cannote somewhat of a bias whereas most of us are just looking to better understand an issue that is not fully understood by all. many of us are not so eager to push the issue under the proverbial rug with statements like "it just is."

Peace

Bold Soul

05-23-2003, 09:51 PM

Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by darrow:
What do you need to be called a homosexual?

1) same-sex orientation but do not actual engage in the physical act?
2) having sex with someone of the same sex?
3) 1 and 2?

Can you be a homosexual and just have trait number 1?

Same question as previous but just have trait number 2?

Is it possible that number 2 is a choice but number 1 isn't?

i have other questions, but I'm going home now.

have a good weekend! Good points.

Does a gay virgin exist? [/QUOTE]This is a very deep question, BTW PhoreAyem.

Cleo Khary

05-23-2003, 10:02 PM

Bold Soul

05-23-2003, 10:06 PM

Originally posted by Eargasm:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bold Soul:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Eargasm:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by PhoreAyem:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bold Soul:
The human sub-organism is a balanced thing. Each gender has elements of male and female. The potential for either is there. There is as much data for genetics as there are against - but there is no known "gay gene" as it were.

It would appear that "homosexuality as genetic trait" is a myth that has been developed in response to the draconian oppression of homosexuals in society. It's the "I know you don't like it, but I can't help it, so let me be" response.

Many homosexual human beings reject the genetics notion on the grounds that it is conciliatory in principal and comes off as an excuse for homosexuality. I tend to agree. Bold,

Could the above description also apply to heterosexuality? It seems hetereosexual is considered the norm, hence,it doesn't come under scrutiny. [/QUOTE]The reason being that heterosexuality propogates the species. [/QUOTE]Sex became politicized as the means of "God's command" to procreate - and those who lead/control the people in the name of "God" used this as a means of societal control.

Heterosexuality and procreation are not one in the same - nor does sexuality have anything to do with procreation unless an act of choice occurs. [/QUOTE]Other than scientific means that came about in the last half century what other means of procreation are there? Magic? Prayer? Again you are not making sense. [/QUOTE]I am asserting that human beings are not genetically predisposed to procreation.

And, mind you, I ALWAYS make sense. That's what pisses people off.

Bold Soul

05-23-2003, 10:10 PM

Originally posted by JMNYC:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MYOR:
May I ask all of you. Have you ever, in grammer school... met someone that you knew was gay... because I don't think a child learns to be gay.. they just simply are... MYOR, on that point, I believe that some kids are taught to change their behavior because it is deemed as "gay" behavior. These are the ones who are more free thinking kids and we allow religious bullshit and political nonsense to stifle them. Then we wonder why they end up serial killers. graemlins/jpshakehead.gif

The kids you see as "gay" when they're young are the ones who are NOT taught to try to be something other than who they are. Maybe they end up sleeping with their own sex, maybe not. I know plenty of effeminate heterosexuals and plenty of butch homos. [/QUOTE]Well, one of mine is in gradeschool, and he's DEFINITELY HETERO! Walking through the Orleans in Las Vegas - young cocktail waitress squatting to get ice.

8 years old and walked into a wall lookin' at that ass! Just like his Daddy!!!

He and I laughed about it all the way back to the hotel. Love my boy! Gal was biz-angin' too. Mad trunkage, yo!

Wild i

05-24-2003, 04:21 AM

Originally posted by C.L.E.O:
with all do respect kara denying or avoiding the issue will not make it go away. I could be wrong but the tone of your posts seem to cannote somewhat of a bias whereas most of us are just looking to better understand an issue that is not fully understood by all. many of us are not so eager to push the issue under the proverbial rug with statements like "it just is."

Peace With all due respect C.L.E.O., what "issue" are you talking about? My being gay is not an issue any more than my being black is an issue -- at least not to me. I JUST AM.

I've known people who have been completely defined by their sexuality and they're a sad lot. There's more to me than that and, I dare say, I am not alone in that feeling. The problem is not in saying "it just is," the problem is in believing and living by that declaration. Unfortunately, most people don't.

TAC

05-24-2003, 06:30 AM

F*ck the bulls*t discussion. Fire and Brimstone. All of you shall rot in hell for bringing such a disgrace upon the human race.

And Bold Soul, your new name is Scientist. There is not a topic that you don't know about!

[ May 24, 2003, 08:11 AM: Message edited by: TAC ]

TAD

05-24-2003, 06:53 AM

God has spoken :D

Wild i

05-24-2003, 07:48 AM

Originally posted by TAC:
F*ck the bulls*t discussion. Fire and Brimstone. All of you shall rot in hell for bringing such a disgrace upon the human race.

And Bold Soul, your new name is Scientist. There is not a topic that you don't know about! I do not feel God's damnation, but I sure as heck have felt man's on occasion.

TAC, you haven't met me in person yet, but pucker up, baby, because you have an awful lot of my ass to kiss. graemlins/spanka.gif

Huey P. Freeman

05-24-2003, 08:03 AM

Originally posted by Wild i:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Eargasm:
Actually after checking into it I had it backwords X chromosome are in the egg and sperm carry x and y. XX=girl XY=boy. A fetus sex is determined at the time of conception by the pairing of these chromosomes. And the "fact" that you are saying about all feti being female is a myth. An unproven hypothisis that some scientist once beleived. To date the it is generally accepted that the fetus is androgenous (SP?). The chemical changes that you speak of does happen about day 27 of gestation. That is when the feti begin to grow their sex organs. [/QUOTE]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~
Ear, I'm a little confused now. I understand the whole XY thing, but on the one hand you're saying the determination happens at conception, while on the other hand you say that it happens at day 27.

All I know is what I see on the discovery channel, and they said maleness is determined "later in the day" so to speak. [/QB][/QUOTE]

Reading is fundamental. graemlins/jpshakehead.gif I said THE SEX ORGAN begins to grow at 27 days. Read again. But the sex of a person is determined at conception. You have never seen or heard anything on discovery channel that told you all feti start out female. That is BS.

Huey P. Freeman

05-24-2003, 08:07 AM

Also you claim to understand "the whole xy thing" as you put it. But if you did you would know "the whole xy thing" happens at conception.

Cleo Khary

05-24-2003, 10:02 AM

Originally posted by Wild i:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by C.L.E.O:
with all do respect kara denying or avoiding the issue will not make it go away. I could be wrong but the tone of your posts seem to cannote somewhat of a bias whereas most of us are just looking to better understand an issue that is not fully understood by all. many of us are not so eager to push the issue under the proverbial rug with statements like "it just is."

Peace With all due respect C.L.E.O., what "issue" are you talking about? My being gay is not an issue any more than my being black is an issue -- at least not to me. I JUST AM.

I've known people who have been completely defined by their sexuality and they're a sad lot. There's more to me than that and, I dare say, I am not alone in that feeling. The problem is not in saying "it just is," the problem is in believing and living by that declaration. Unfortunately, most people don't. [/QUOTE]Actually Wild i, you may have noticed that my post was specifically directed at "kara" in referrence to her earlier post so I am not sure how "you" "Wild i" being gay has been construed as being an issue.

This topic was started as a means of intelligently "discussing" the different opinions regarding the issue of homosexuality being genetic or learned as the topic suggests. I in no way intend to offend anyone nor do I profess to be in a position to judge anyone other than myself. I do however take the liberty of expanding my level of understanding and awareness and DHP has proven to be a very viable forum upon which to accomplish this.

I am an inherently i.e. "genetically" analytical person thus it is not enough for me to accept the statement "it just is," paticularly when their are many people willing the discuss the issue in a mature, non-judgemental way.

Afterall history has shown us that things are indeed not always what they seem.

Peace

Cleo Khary

05-24-2003, 10:07 AM

Originally posted by 6 23:
Another question .. by gay is the implied meaning people who have sex with the same sex? What exactly do people understand gay to mean? Would someone please answer this question...

kara

05-24-2003, 10:21 AM

c.l.e.o, i hear what you're saying ... and i get where you are coming from, my contributions are really meant with full respect. my communication skills are not the best ... but i dont meant to devalue the interest or expressions of what ya'll are saying, i was trying to illustrate that this debate that has gone on is futile .. that society has created this need to find the 'reason' for homosexuality .. that maybe the people asking the question should ask why am i asking this ... , as well as offer that its not a question that can even be asked, that its not a question that can even be answered... that its not an issue that needs to be explored - but not because it lacks importance, but because it devalues homosexuality, and most importantly, sets to answer somethign for which there is NO answer.

smile.gif

i think people are made to defend being gay, others are asking because they condemn homosexuality, and others are seduced to this questioning by the paradigms society has created

what would it matter if we had an answer? ...that it would change the state of policy and intellectual thought? that it would change how people think about homosexuality? i 100% disagree ...

If skin-colour were a choice, would racism be justified?

Would it then be completely reasonable to say that only if you are a particular color are you allowed to marry or join organisations or enjoy hospital visiting rights? If skin-color were a choice, would it be reasonable to say that some skin-colors were sinful or evil or immoral, and others not? By the same token, has the fact that skin-color is genetically determined, swayed the opinions of those who discriminate against other races?

do people ask 'why am i white? why am i black?' ... no, because its not a question that should even be asked.

i dig the ideas and the interest of this communitythough, so i hope i dont come across as trying to shut anyone up .. i wanted to offer what ive seen and learned and hope that its taken as such .. as some ideas to think about offered to the people interested in the subject, and at the same time read what everyone else is saying and learn myself

graemlins/beerchug.gif
- kara

[ May 24, 2003, 11:31 AM: Message edited by: kara ]

kara

05-24-2003, 10:23 AM

sorry, double post

[ May 24, 2003, 11:24 AM: Message edited by: kara ]

Cleo Khary

05-24-2003, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by kara:
c.l.e.o, i hear what you're saying ... and i get where you are coming from, my contributions are really meant with full respect. my communication skills are not the best ... but i dont meant to devalue the interest or expressions of what ya'll are saying, i was trying to illustrate that this debate that has gone on is futile .. that society has created this need to find the 'reason' for homosexuality .. that maybe the people asking the question should ask why am i asking this ... , as well as offer that its not a question that can even be asked, that its not a question that can even be answered... that its not an issue that needs to be explored - but not because it lacks importance, but because it devalues homosexuality, and most importantly, sets to answer somethign for which there is NO answer.

smile.gif

i think people are made to defend being gay, others are asking because they condemn homosexuality, and others are seduced to this questioning by the paradigms society has created

what would it matter if we had an answer? ...that it would change the state of policy and intellectual thought? that it would change how people think about homosexuality? i 100% disagree ...

If skin-colour were a choice, would racism be justified?

Would it then be completely reasonable to say that only if you are a particular color are you allowed to marry or join organisations or enjoy hospital visiting rights? If skin-color were a choice, would it be reasonable to say that some skin-colors were sinful or evil or immoral, and others not? By the same token, has the fact that skin-color is genetically determined, swayed the opinions of those who discriminate against other races?

do people ask 'why am i white? why am i black?' ... no, because its not a question that should even be asked.

i dig the ideas and the interest of this communitythough, so i hope i dont come across as trying to shut anyone up .. i wanted to offer what ive seen and learned and hope that its taken as such .. as some ideas to think about offered to the people interested in the subject, and at the same time read what everyone else is saying and learn myself

graemlins/beerchug.gif
- kara Your input and opinions are definitely valued and respected kara. If we all thought/felt the same way this world would be a boring place ;)

I do however think that comparing race/skin color to sexuality may not be comparing apples to apples but your argument is quite intriguing.

Peace

[ May 24, 2003, 11:40 AM: Message edited by: C.L.E.O ]

FemalePhenom

05-24-2003, 10:55 AM

This topic has created a hot discussion. After reading everyone's response, the science of it all became very confusing for me. I do not believe that sexuality is inherited at all. I also do not believe that it is taught. For example, even if a man was raised being taught to act like a woman, his true sexual orientation will win out.

I am still looking for an answer to "Does a gay virgin exist?" My first answer would be ofcourse, because I subscribe to the belief that an individual is born with a specific sexual orientation. However, their real orientation may not seem apparent from a young age because a certain amount of self-discovery takes place as every individual matures. Part of that discovery is when he or she chooses to be sexually active. A girl's first experience can be with a girl. She could have liked girls all along and was just waiting for the girl of her dreams to come along before she had sex for the first time. However, that is a different interpretation of the word "virgin". Are we defining virgin as having not slept with a man and sex as intercourse between a woman and a man? Or are we using a more broad interpretation of those words? Just wondering, because then I would probably have to change my answer graemlins/conf44.gif

I was also wondering if those of you participating in this discussion would reveal his or her sexual orientation, and if not, why? smile.gif

I hope everyone has a fun and safe Memorial Day!

TAC

05-24-2003, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by Wild i:
TAC, you haven't met me in person yet, but pucker up, baby, because you have an awful lot of my ass to kiss. graemlins/spanka.gif I'm puckering, I'm puckering...

TAC

05-24-2003, 11:48 AM

Who cares!

lesysteme

05-24-2003, 12:05 PM

only in a country like america, where the religious right has a stanglehold on the moral fabiric of the government at the present time, would some of the comments given here be even present...

whatever kara said...nice to see alot of ppl totally missing her points..and jons too

some of u are looking for a way to justify descrimination on a federal and constitional level..or looking for a way to say "well, since god didnt make it so, there must be some other way this can actually be"

can you not see the flaws of this arguement????

it pre disposed that whatever GOD (ofcourse assuming the christian god) says is right and arguments must be brought up to refute this fact

ask yourselves this; since gay and lesian couples cannot reap many of the benefits and financial rewards offered to straight couples, isnt it only fair that they pay less taxes? hmm didnt think so

god didnt write the constitution yet the "WORD OF GOD" is allowed to be brought into discussions on the way g&l ppl are treated in our society..as if it justifies this discrimination.

there was a recent murder trial that was thrown out (thankfully) cause the jury used the bible to reference their verdict...and rightly so it was thrown out..the bible is a not a constitutional document or a set of laws that govern the USA....fortunately for me and unfortunately so others

infact the founding fathers of the USA went OUT OF THEIR WAY to make the consitiution a totally secular document, it wasnt until the 50s that things like "in god we trust" were added to the wording of many federal documents

TAC

05-24-2003, 12:49 PM

Originally posted by lesysteme:
only in a country like america, where the religious right has a stanglehold on the moral fabiric of the government at the present time, would some of the comments given here be even present...

whatever kara said...nice to see alot of ppl totally missing her points..and jons too [snip...]Whoa someone finally picked up on all the bullsh*t arugments, and said it.

The bottom line is everything that is going on her are the same arguments that are used to discriminate.

I read JMNYC's comment closely, and they made the most sense in all of this. I was too disgusted with some of the things that the rest were saying so kara's comments got lost in the chatter...

Peace
TAC

And

05-24-2003, 01:26 PM

C.L.E.O I'm reading you loud and clear ...

Bold Soul

05-24-2003, 01:52 PM

Well, if science supports homosexuality is not genetic, and therefore predicated on choice...

Science has also proven that RACE IS NOT GENETIC. Does this not also predicate choice?

And

05-24-2003, 02:01 PM

Another issue to consider is the use of Science as the deciding factor for homo/heterosexuality. There are people who use their religion as the deciding factor on what they believe. How do the two reconcile their differences in belief? Sometimes all the thinking leaves me with no answers on issues. It could sound like a cop out but as far as this issue goes, I really, really just don't know.

kara

05-24-2003, 02:06 PM

i dont think that's a copout .. i think that's honest

maybe its okay not to know ... not to have some 'concrete' answer ... just a thought

(i was a philosophy major, maybe this comes out)

Randall Clobby

05-24-2003, 02:08 PM

I met this older guy when i was fifteen. He taught me how to suck dick, rim ass, and tweak nipples. He taught me about Diesel, Replay, Paper Cloth, and Denim, and Prada. He taught me about Crystal, Cocaine, Ketamine, Ecstasy, and Amyl Nitrate. He taught me about disco, Ron Hardy, Derrick Carter, and Tee Scott.

It's definitely taught.

Bold Soul

05-24-2003, 02:09 PM

Originally posted by 6 23:
Another issue to consider is the use of Science as the deciding factor for homo/heterosexuality. There are people who use their religion as the deciding factor on what they believe. How do the two reconcile their differences in belief? Sometimes all the thinking leaves me with no answers on issues. It could sound like a cop out but as far as this issue goes, I really, really just don't know. Quantification is possibly the only method of proving anything on a species level - which is what sexual preference and race is about - the species.

Religion is full of superlatives and is entirely subjective. Science allows for analysis and assessment of things unaffected by perception. Constants and anomolies - absolutes and abstractions - science brings to bear information that one must decide to fool themselves to deny.

Some of our greatest philosophers were also scientists.

JMNYC

05-24-2003, 02:12 PM

First, the Gay Virgin question:

of COURSE gay virgins exist - you can know what you want but either by choice, coincidence or circumstance not be able to get it, or just not know what you want until you experience it first-hand.

Okay, now I would like to know people's feelings about the question of defining homosexuality - are we talking about people who have sex with others of the same sex?

What definition of sex are we using? What about someone who is celebate but in a loving relationship?

If someone's gay partner became quadraplegic and they couldn't have sex? Wouldn't they still be "gay"?

We use the term to describe distinctly different things. Relationships, Love and Sexual Behavior are all tied together BECAUSE OF RELIGIOUS DOCTRINES and SOCIETAL NORMS that were set by those RELIGIOUS DOCTRINES. If we separate them (which we do even if we don't admit it - by having one-night stands, cheating, being on the "DL", etc.), the lines become blurred and all of a sudden we're not so different from each other anymore.

And

05-24-2003, 02:19 PM

Originally posted by Bold Soul:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by 6 23:
Another issue to consider is the use of Science as the deciding factor for homo/heterosexuality. There are people who use their religion as the deciding factor on what they believe. How do the two reconcile their differences in belief? Sometimes all the thinking leaves me with no answers on issues. It could sound like a cop out but as far as this issue goes, I really, really just don't know. Quantification is possibly the only method of proving anything on a species level - which is what sexual preference and race is about - the species.

Religion is full of superlatives and is entirely subjective. Science allows for analysis and assessment of things unaffected by perception. Constants and anomolies - absolutes and abstractions - science brings to bear information that one must decide to fool themselves to deny.

Some of our greatest philosophers were also scientists. [/QUOTE]Going by this response, I'm feeling the "answer" to these issues has yet to be determined ... unless I missed it somewhere in the thread. Heh, heh.
Goodness gracious Bold Soul, I believe somene said it before. Is there anything you don't know about. ;)

Bold Soul

05-24-2003, 02:24 PM

Originally posted by 6 23:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bold Soul:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by 6 23:
Another issue to consider is the use of Science as the deciding factor for homo/heterosexuality. There are people who use their religion as the deciding factor on what they believe. How do the two reconcile their differences in belief? Sometimes all the thinking leaves me with no answers on issues. It could sound like a cop out but as far as this issue goes, I really, really just don't know. Quantification is possibly the only method of proving anything on a species level - which is what sexual preference and race is about - the species.

Religion is full of superlatives and is entirely subjective. Science allows for analysis and assessment of things unaffected by perception. Constants and anomolies - absolutes and abstractions - science brings to bear information that one must decide to fool themselves to deny.

Some of our greatest philosophers were also scientists. [/QUOTE]Going by this response, I'm feeling the "answer" to these issues has yet to be determined ... unless I missed it somewhere in the thread. Heh, heh.
Goodness gracious Bold Soul, I believe somene said it before. Is there anything you don't know about. ;) [/QUOTE]I don't know.

And

05-24-2003, 02:29 PM

chuckles ... @ Bold SOul ;)

Wild i

05-24-2003, 02:37 PM

Originally posted by C.L.E.O:
Actually Wild i, you may have noticed that my post was specifically directed at "kara" in referrence to her earlier post so I am not sure how "you" "Wild i" being gay has been construed as being an issue.

This topic was started as a means of intelligently "discussing" the different opinions regarding the issue of homosexuality being genetic or learned as the topic suggests. I in no way intend to offend anyone nor do I profess to be in a position to judge anyone other than myself. I do however take the liberty of expanding my level of understanding and awareness and DHP has proven to be a very viable forum upon which to accomplish this.

I am an inherently i.e. "genetically" analytical person thus it is not enough for me to accept the statement "it just is," paticularly when their are many people willing the discuss the issue in a mature, non-judgemental way.

Afterall history has shown us that things are indeed not always what they seem.

Peace [/QUOTE]

I did understand that you were responding to Kara's post. I in no way took it personally. I only used the personal pronoun by way of illustration. I was concerned that such usage could be misunderstood, but at that red hot moment, it was all I had time to come up with.

My point was simply this: this whole gay/straight thing is only an issue because people choose to make it so, but frequently it is of no issue to those most intimately involved. I am not being as eloquent as I would like. I think JMNYC said it best.

Please, I have taken no offense in anything in this thread (yet). I have, in fact, been quite pleased with the discourse, as much as I wish it were unnecessary. Please continue.

Bold Soul

05-24-2003, 02:40 PM

Originally posted by Wild i:
[QUOTE]My point was simply this: this whole gay/straight thing is only an issue because people choose to make it so, but frequently it is of no issue to those most intimately involved. I am not being as eloquent as I would like. I think JMNYC said it best.

Please, I have taken no offense in anything in this thread (yet). I have, in fact, been quite pleased with the discourse, as much as I wish it were unnecessary. Please continue. Quite eloquent.

kara

05-24-2003, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by Bold Soul:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Wild i:

My point was simply this: this whole gay/straight thing is only an issue because people choose to make it so, but frequently it is of no issue to those most intimately involved. I am not being as eloquent as I would like. I think JMNYC said it best.

Please, I have taken no offense in anything in this thread (yet). I have, in fact, been quite pleased with the discourse, as much as I wish it were unnecessary. Please continue. Quite eloquent. agreed

Cleo Khary

05-24-2003, 05:02 PM

Originally posted by kara:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bold Soul:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Wild i:

My point was simply this: this whole gay/straight thing is only an issue because people choose to make it so, but frequently it is of no issue to those most intimately involved. I am not being as eloquent as I would like. I think JMNYC said it best.

Please, I have taken no offense in anything in this thread (yet). I have, in fact, been quite pleased with the discourse, as much as I wish it were unnecessary. Please continue. Quite eloquent. agreed [/QUOTE]agreed plus 1 ;)

All of the posts clearly demonstrate that there is an overwhelming amount of disparity (whether one thinks it a a vital topic of discussion or not). Most interesting to me is that some of this disparity exists among individuals who consider themselves to infact be gay...

Perhaps growing up in a westernized Judaeo-Christian society has skewed my concept of what is important (if nothing else but to have more knowledge). At the same time I can't help but wonder (cultural biases aside) why many think this topic should'nt even be discussed?

If we keep it real, one's sexuality IS of importance in the society in which we live (Im not saying that it is right just keeping it real) and it would seeem to me that an mature educational experience like this can only improve understanding by heightning awareness thus providing additional opportunities for universal equality.

Peace

martino

05-25-2003, 02:53 AM

here's another one to chew on:
Is there really such a thing as bi-sexuality?
If you settle down in a monogamous relationship, does that mean you
forfit the right to call yourself bi-sexual? haha

what bunch of nonsense. at least sexuality isn't broken down into as many
subgenre's as house music.

You dont choose who youre attracted to (or fall in love with). not even society can shape you to do that.
Please realize your own bias when you think about these things.
One of my best friends fathers is gay...after being married for years, having 3 children all the while trying his damnest to deny his sexuality...
i guess he just up and changed his mind half way through his life and decided to spice up his life by being gay? c'mon...
PS. that stuff about molestation leading to homosexuality was ridiculous. graemlins/stupid.gif

05-25-2003, 03:34 AM

Don't mind me, I'm just jackin' this thread. http://deephousepage.com/smilies/juggle.gif

Wild i

05-25-2003, 05:32 AM

Originally posted by C.L.E.O:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kara:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bold Soul:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Wild i:

My point was simply this: ... Please continue. Quite eloquent. agreed [/QUOTE]agreed plus 1 ;)

All of the posts clearly demonstrate that there is an overwhelming amount of disparity (whether one thinks it a a vital topic of discussion or not). Most interesting to me is that some of this disparity exists among individuals who consider themselves to infact be gay...

Perhaps growing up in a westernized Judaeo-Christian society has skewed my concept of what is important (if nothing else but to have more knowledge). At the same time I can't help but wonder (cultural biases aside) why many think this topic should'nt even be discussed?

If we keep it real, one's sexuality IS of importance in the society in which we live (Im not saying that it is right just keeping it real) and it would seeem to me that an mature educational experience like this can only improve understanding by heightning awareness thus providing additional opportunities for universal equality.

Peace [/QUOTE]Your first para reminds me of this class I took years ago where we would read current newspaper articles, then discuss them as a class. One such article was about the disparity between rich vs poor Blacks. The majority ofthe class couldn't understand the disparity. Afterall, we're all Black, right? I, as one of the only two Blacks in class (GWU_D.C.), asked them how their rich (white) fathers would feel about them bringing home someone from Lafayette Park. Of course they agreed each father would be incensed. So why, I asked, would my Black father, who had propably worked twice as hard for his money, feel any differently. But overall, I haven't noticed anyone who I know is gay post that they feel it's a choice, unless I missed it (possible, since I sometimes skim).

I say all that to say, of course there's a disparity of opinions because each of us is an individual.

Whew! (It's hard typing on a keyboard with a bum space barm but that's what you get when you're visiting someone who actually has a life...)

I think the prevailing feeling is not that this topic shouldn't be discussed, but that it should be -necessary to discussed. I kind of goes back to what I was saying about being an issue. It shouldn't be an issue, but, alas, we all know it is, so...

I suppose in the end, it's true what you say. One's sexuality is of importance in a society inasmuch as society as a whole as a vested interest in the behaviors of its members. It's a common fantasy that one can be "free" to do what and whenever one wants, but a fantasy is all it is because if we all did it society would crumble and the only thing there would be left to do is survive (somebody please explain this to my son). Nevertheless, we need to monitor the level of encroachment on personal freedom in the interest of the greater society lest we find ourselves sacrifice the prize for the contest.

Cleo Khary

05-25-2003, 07:56 PM

Originally posted by Wild i:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by C.L.E.O:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by kara:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bold Soul:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Wild i:

My point was simply this: ... Please continue. Quite eloquent. agreed [/QUOTE]agreed plus 1 ;)

All of the posts clearly demonstrate that there is an overwhelming amount of disparity (whether one thinks it a a vital topic of discussion or not). Most interesting to me is that some of this disparity exists among individuals who consider themselves to infact be gay...

Perhaps growing up in a westernized Judaeo-Christian society has skewed my concept of what is important (if nothing else but to have more knowledge). At the same time I can't help but wonder (cultural biases aside) why many think this topic should'nt even be discussed?

If we keep it real, one's sexuality IS of importance in the society in which we live (Im not saying that it is right just keeping it real) and it would seeem to me that an mature educational experience like this can only improve understanding by heightning awareness thus providing additional opportunities for universal equality.

Peace [/QUOTE]Your first para reminds me of this class I took years ago where we would read current newspaper articles, then discuss them as a class. One such article was about the disparity between rich vs poor Blacks. The majority ofthe class couldn't understand the disparity. Afterall, we're all Black, right? I, as one of the only two Blacks in class (GWU_D.C.), asked them how their rich (white) fathers would feel about them bringing home someone from Lafayette Park. Of course they agreed each father would be incensed. So why, I asked, would my Black father, who had propably worked twice as hard for his money, feel any differently. But overall, I haven't noticed anyone who I know is gay post that they feel it's a choice, unless I missed it (possible, since I sometimes skim).

I say all that to say, of course there's a disparity of opinions because each of us is an individual.

Whew! (It's hard typing on a keyboard with a bum space barm but that's what you get when you're visiting someone who actually has a life...)

I think the prevailing feeling is not that this topic shouldn't be discussed, but that it should be -necessary to discussed. I kind of goes back to what I was saying about being an issue. It shouldn't be an issue, but, alas, we all know it is, so...

I suppose in the end, it's true what you say. One's sexuality is of importance in a society inasmuch as society as a whole as a vested interest in the behaviors of its members. It's a common fantasy that one can be "free" to do what and whenever one wants, but a fantasy is all it is because if we all did it society would crumble and the only thing there would be left to do is survive (somebody please explain this to my son). Nevertheless, we need to monitor the level of encroachment on personal freedom in the interest of the greater society lest we find ourselves sacrifice the prize for the contest. [/QUOTE]Wild i, I am not sure I understand your paragraph on why the topic should or shouldn't be discussed (I know you mentioned you are using someone elses computer). Please clarify for me.

I can appreciate your feelings on encroachment on personal freedom, however, do you feel that this discussion in any way encroaches upon anyones personal freedom? Everyone that has participated in this discussion has done so by choice and of their own freewill. I personally view it only as a "learning opportunity" and not an opportunity to judge or or even persuade.

I think it is obvious that I hold a different opinion than you regarding this topic and that is due in part to my beliefs and experiences but the fact that we hold these differences in opinion shold not preclude us from discussing them. Who knows, maybe through such discussions people will adopt a more accurate understanding of this topic, or maybe the wont, or maybe they will decide that no adoption is necessary at all. We will never know until we know....

Peace

JMNYC

05-25-2003, 08:48 PM

okay, I'll bite:

Originally posted by martino:
here's another one to chew on:
Is there really such a thing as bi-sexuality?
If you settle down in a monogamous relationship, does that mean you
forfit the right to call yourself bi-sexual? haha

Bisexuality and monogomy can co-exist - bisexuality doesn't mean you sleep with both sexes behind the other's back or simultaneously.

what bunch of nonsense. at least sexuality isn't broken down into as many
subgenre's as house music.

AGREED!

You dont choose who youre attracted to (or fall in love with). not even society can shape you to do that.

On this, I disagree. Let's talk about celebrities, models, magazine covers ... c'mon - society CAN and DOES shape what you're attracted to, as do family members.

Please realize your own bias when you think about these things.
One of my best friends fathers is gay...after being married for years, having 3 children all the while trying his damnest to deny his sexuality...
i guess he just up and changed his mind half way through his life and decided to spice up his life by being gay? c'mon...
PS. that stuff about molestation leading to homosexuality was ridiculous. graemlins/stupid.gif

On all of this, I'm witcha.