Human Sexuality

[Dark Moth]

@Cloris:

Well, since I'm sure you had me in mind when posting, you've once again shown how some people automatically associate religion with hatred. It's nice to know you think I'm bigoted just for disagreeing with something. And I did say that homosexuality was a choice, but only with some people. Unfortunately, I didn't make myself clear enough on that. I merely attempted to say that it is not all genetics, as some claim. It is both, and there are many factors involved in the process, including environment and heredity. And I will reiterate: disagreeing with homosexuality is not the same as hating homesexuals.

Edited July 22, 2005 by Mothman

[><FISH'>]

The simplest way to figure out if homosexuals choose their sexuality is to simply ask one.

 

No they can not choose their sexuality.

[Walsingham]

Don't ask ME about George Villers. The b*stard still hasn't returned my hat! :D

 

Cloris does make one point I haven't noticed here yet. This is that people do get brought out by certain situations. This is excellent if it is their true orientation. However, I'm just as much against people feeling obliged to be gay as I am against people feeling obliged to be straight. It may not happen so much, but it IS an issue in certain jobs and institutions. I don't want to be rude, so I shan't say where and who.

 

AS another aside I get a little tired by modern sexual one-upsmanship. In certain circles being straight is like the lowest rung, and almost below contempt. Gay people usually chip in with how much sexier they are, since they have to make an effort to embrace their sexuality. But gay people are shortly trumped by bi-sexuals who can fancy anyone they please! I always get the mad urge to claim to be tri-sexual just to confuse the issue.

[Gabrielle]

Bi Bi Baby. Have the best of both worlds.

[cewekeds]

Hey, nobody said homosexuality is a simply choice or even not as complicated as you said it to be.

 

I did list some of the health issues from homosexuality, but that got deleted. I am just saying that homosexuals are more vulnerlable to AIDs, one of the biggest enemies of mankind. Homosexuality is not wrong, but unhealthy and not safe. If you disagree with that part, then list your evidences.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Then why do so many kids born in africa have HIV?

 

People having unsafe sex are more liking to get STD then anybody. We should not let ignorant people to have sex. maybe we can make certificate and only allow those people to have sex. :D

[Lucius]

Hey, nobody said homosexuality is a simply choice or even not as complicated as you said it to be.

 

I did list some of the health issues from homosexuality, but that got deleted. I am just saying that homosexuals are more vulnerlable to AIDs, one of the biggest enemies of mankind. Homosexuality is not wrong, but unhealthy and not safe. If you disagree with that part, then list your evidences.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I thought we clearly refuted these so called heath issued, I mean, nr. 3 was pure nonsense and the other two applies to straight people as well. As some other poster said, Aids among straights is also bad. (pssst, dude, this isn't tge 80'ies anymore, wake up)

 

As for my personal stance on religion and Christianity, well my sig says it all I think. ^_^

[Musopticon?]

Let's try and NOT drag religion in to this. Just this once, okay?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Do go on. I rather observe than burninate anyway.

[julianw]

Just because you never heard of it doesn't mean it's nonsense. Some one else pointed out that no.3 happens quite frequently.

 

First two only happens to some of the straight people, but all homosexuals suffer from it.

[Walsingham]

Hey, nobody said homosexuality is a simply choice or even not as complicated as you said it to be.

 

I did list some of the health issues from homosexuality, but that got deleted. I am just saying that homosexuals are more vulnerlable to AIDs, one of the biggest enemies of mankind. Homosexuality is not wrong, but unhealthy and not safe. If you disagree with that part, then list your evidences.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Fairy snuff.* And I appreciate you're being polite, which is always commendable.

 

AIDS HIV is a serious problem precisely because it is wreaking havoc in heterosexuals who are the majority of the population. I lost a childhood friend to this disease two years ago, and they weren't gay in the least. As if such an illustration were needed.

 

Moreover, you seem to be focussing on a single type of homosexual intercourse. I think I'm not far wrong in asserting that not all homosexuals use penetrative methods. I could go on, but in deference to the Grand Greenie I won't.

 

Basically I accept your point that homosexuality can have health hazards, but they can and are managed/avoided by the majority of homosexuals. At least to a comparable point to heterosexuals.

 

So my question is, besides health is there any reason why it is bad?

 

 

*Slang, meaning "Fair enough", you feelthy foreigners, not a kind of movie.

[Taoreich]

To believe it is simply a "choice" is not only wrong, but is quite frankly delusional and almost criminal in its ignorance.

preceeded by

(someone living in a well-educated, affluent urban area is statistically much more likely to express rather than repress a tendency towards same-sex attraction than someone in  a rural, economically depressed, and poorly educated area)

 

So on the one hand, it's almost criminal to state that it's a choice but on the other you just cited a statistic indicating that there are factors which cause some one to express rather than repress this inclination; the latter might be described as a, dare I say, choice.

Also, indicating that King James is a hypocrite for the positioning of homosexuality whilst presumably dabbling on the side indicates that he was responsible for this positioning. To my knowledge, James commisioned the translation, and it drew acclaim beacuse it was considered the most comprehensive English translation to date, but he didn't write it.

 

Personally, I could care less about what your view is, but at least be accurate when attempting to self-righteously seize the intellectual high ground.

[Dark Moth]

Hey, nobody said homosexuality is a simply choice or even not as complicated as you said it to be.

 

I did list some of the health issues from homosexuality, but that got deleted. I am just saying that homosexuals are more vulnerlable to AIDs, one of the biggest enemies of mankind. Homosexuality is not wrong, but unhealthy and not safe. If you disagree with that part, then list your evidences.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I thought we clearly refuted these so called heath issued, I mean, nr. 3 was pure nonsense and the other two applies to straight people as well. As some other poster said, Aids among straights is also bad. (pssst, dude, this isn't tge 80'ies anymore, wake up)

 

As for my personal stance on religion and Christianity, well my sig says it all I think. ^_^

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well, your sig has Christianity's intentions wrong. " And unless you've read and studied the Bible, please do not try to pretend you have. Many times Christians have committed crimes against individuals and humanity, but that is not Christianity's doing, that is the work of human cruelty and religion being misinterpreted. You find the same things going on with Islam. Christianity does not want to find the world ugly, its goal is to help out the ugly things. :D Homosexuals, too, must be accepted and respected.

Edited July 22, 2005 by Mothman

[cewekeds]

Just because you never heard of it doesn't mean it's nonsense. Some one else pointed out that no.3 happens quite frequently.

 

First two only happens to some of the straight people, but all homosexuals suffer from it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

My gay roomate never had any of those problems.

[alanschu]

Heh, much like a counterstrike forum will have a ton of firearm "experts," seems as though this does too

[metadigital]

You'll find that homosexuality is often a reflection of environment.  They're more often located in locations such as overpopulation and whatnot.

 

There's an increased predisposition towards homosexual activity (and experimentation) when overpopulation is combined with a socially restricting stigma.

 

The patterns are also shared in species outside of human beings.

 

I would wager that homosexuality is not necessarily genetics, since there's little correlation between a homosexual having relatives that are homosexual as well.  I would think the environment has a lot more to do with it.  And for some that have experimented both ways, I'd say it is choice.

 

I would suspect that a lot of our notions of "choice" are influenced by our perceptions of homosexuality.  And depending on what you would classify as homosexuality, there's certainly choice available.  Is there anything really stopping us, aside from our perceptions about homosexuality and the sociological upbringing we had and all these environmental constraints, from having sex with someone of the same sex?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, current research suggests that there is more than one "gay" gene.

 

The current theory is that these genes give various advantages to the bearers, such as better empathy, for example, and that only the agglomeration of many of these "gay" genes makes a person "gay". There is also reason to believe that it is down to the endocrimal amniotic mixture whilst the embryo is interuterine, and specifically the testosterone concentrations at various critical (and not yet determined) stages of early development.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would really like to see a reference for this.

 

The National Association for Resarch and Therapy of Homosexuality pretty much says otherwise

 

There was a study that showed a slightly less than 50% correlation between twins both being homosexual, but two other geneticists analyzed the data and claimed it was more support for environment than inheritance.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This book was published in the last few weeks; I saw an interview with the author (and some homosexual celebrities who all volunteered anecdotes to back up the findings) of the non-fiction book.

 

The author has completed extensive studies with twins and siblings; he was adament that there were several (half-a-dozen) genes that can be shown to influence gender orientation which, when acted on with as yet unknown concentrations of testosterone on the interuterine embryo at critical early developmental stages, caused a predisposition towards homosexuality. This would seem to me to be quite reasonable, as it would help explain the spectrum of genders; I certainly think there is more to human gender than two poles: hetrosexual male and female.

 

1. I am not arguing that homosexuality is completely genetically determined.

2. I am certainly no expert in the field.

3. Try to remember that this is a very complex subject, not least because there are sexual preferences that are definitely (solely) environmentally influenced, such as sado-masochism (high court judges trying to balance their consciences with their life-and-death power over other human beings) and fetishes (people who were exposed to, say, rubber or urine when "learning" about their sexuality).

 

Now, just to include some of the references you quote:

"Gay gene" researcher Dean Hamer was asked by Scientific American if homosexuality was rooted solely in biology. He replied:

"Absolutely not. From twin studies, we already know that half or more of the variability in sexual orientation is not inherited. Our studies try to pinpoint the genetic factors...not negate the psychosocial factors." [New Evidence of a 'Gay Gene', by Anastasia Toufexis, Time, November 13, 1995, vol. 146, Issue 20, p. 95]

...the question of the appropriate significance level to apply to a nonMendelian trait such as sexual orientation is problematic. [Hamer, D. H., et al. Response to Risch, N., et al., Male Sexual Orientation and Genetic Evidence, Science 262 (1993), pp. 2063-65]

From "Gay Brain" Researcher Simon LeVay

"At this point, the most widely held opinion [on causation of homosexuality] is that multiple factors play a role." [LeVay, Simon (1996). Queer Science, MIT Press.]

From Dennis McFadden, University of Texas neuroscientist:

"Any human behavior is going to be the result of complex intermingling of genetics and environment. It would be astonishing if it were not true for homosexuality." [Scientists Challenge Notion that Homosexuality's a Matter of Choice, The Charlotte Observer, August 9, 1998]

 

As I said, I am by no means an expert on the subject, but I am very wary of those people who inist that homosexuality is a choice, because their unstated implication is that the choice is wrong and these people are "evil" or "perverted". Where on;y one step away from 1943 Germany, and the "re-education camps" for these poor erstwhile souls ...

[Walsingham]

Is there a proctologist in the house?

 

 

And taoreich, the stat that says you get different levels of homosexuality expressed in different environments does not say the true condition changes. It just says that whether people 'come out' changes. Growing up with Klan parents won't stop you finding black girls attractive. But it will certainly prevent you taking them to the prom.

 

 

EDIT: Nice going, Meta. Thanks for bringing things up a notch. It is true that sexuality is complex. I happen to like cute brunettes and bubbly chesty blondes. Someone else likes the same, but with different undercarriages. Why should we care?

 

just for the record I'd reiterate that this all predicates on the feelings being mutual. Finding kids sexy IS wrong, for example.

[Darth Flatus]

The "health problems" julianw raised - fistula is the word you are looking for, while it is true a particular type of action can lead to this condition over time and heavily repeated use this condition can be caused by other stuff too and occur in hetero women as well.

 

Anyway i am interested in the external factors that may lead to someone being gay. Does this account for "campness" where a gay man takes on a persona he belives would identify him as gay?

[alanschu]

Ah, the book is quite new.

 

I'll probably pick it up.

 

 

I guess now that I think a bit more about it, it probably wouldn't be too different from transexuality, since I'd wager a good chunk of homosexual men are transexual in nature, and consider themselves to be a woman (TV and movies certainly fulfills this stereotype). And I do remember one of my professors talking about the possibilities of genetic traits causing the "woman inside a man's body" situations.

 

In between the goofiness and whatnot, I actually don't mind this thread. I was making an attempt at serious discussion, but I probably should have known better than to bring up a subject like this :D

[Taoreich]

As I said, I am by no means an expert on the subject, but I am very wary of those people who inist that homosexuality is a choice, because their unstated implication is that the choice is wrong and these people are "evil" or "perverted". Where on;y one step away from 1943 Germany, and the "re-education camps" for these poor erstwhile souls ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Nothing like one presupposition to serve another. You've just foisted the homosexiphobic bigotry/nazi tag (albiet with the "wary" caveat, indicating your openmindedness) onto those who believe that there is choice involved, because you believe they have similarly foisted an "evil" or "perverse" tag on the gay population.

[alanschu]

Is there a proctologist in the house?

 

 

And taoreich, the stat that says you get different levels of homosexuality expressed in different environments does not say the true condition changes. It just says that whether people 'come out' changes. Growing up with Klan parents won't stop you finding black girls attractive. But it will certainly prevent you taking them to the prom.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Actually I bet it would, as there'd be strong sociological and psychological influences from the environment to make you think like that.

 

Of course there's always exceptions.

[julianw]

So my question is, besides health is there any reason why it is bad?

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Nope.

Since I am not religious and don't have a universal moral standard to judge all humans, I have no right to say it's wrong or right. I just want to get the facts straight.

 

Thanks, Darth Flatus, for the actual name of the condition.

[Walsingham]

Is there a proctologist in the house?

 

 

And taoreich, the stat that says you get different levels of homosexuality expressed in different environments does not say the true condition changes. It just says that whether people 'come out' changes. Growing up with Klan parents won't stop you finding black girls attractive. But it will certainly prevent you taking them to the prom.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Actually I bet it would, as there'd be strong sociological and psychological influences from the environment to make you think like that.

 

Of course there's always exceptions.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hah! Fair enough. You'd need to get into mind-reading to know that one for sure.

 

I mean, aren't we missing something, which is that personality has a huge part to play in attraction. I know i can't be getting dates on my looks alone!

[Reveilled]

Oh, and KJVB doesn't teach that homosexuality is wrong -- it teaches that it is an "abomination" which is, in context, something unfit for Jews. Never mind the hypocrisy of James I while he was overseeing this little project (ask the Brits on the board about George Villers, Duke of Buckingham).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

This was most likely a lie made up by the people of London who were resentful over having a Scot as their monarch (The English didn't much like having a King from a civilised nation " ). James I was also accused of being a pedophile, as well as having extremely bad BO. It is unlikely that George Villers was actually James I's homosexual lover.

 

 

I don't see why it matters whether Homosexuality is a choice or not. What two consenting adults wish to do is no one's business but their own. It's not your business, it's not the church's business, and it certainly, unequivocally, is not the state's business.

Don't like it? Then shut up and don't do it.

[Taoreich]

And taoreich, the stat that says you get different levels of homosexuality expressed in different environments does not say the true condition changes. It just says that whether people 'come out' changes. Growing up with Klan parents won't stop you finding black girls attractive. But it will certainly prevent you taking them to the prom.

 

So let's define terms. What is gay/homosexuality? Is one gay who

(i) finds another male attractive on a one-off basis?

(ii) only finds men attractive?

(iii) has engaged in one-off sexual contact with men?

(iv) has committed themselves to a lifestyle of sexual contact with men?

[alanschu]

Is there a proctologist in the house?

 

 

And taoreich, the stat that says you get different levels of homosexuality expressed in different environments does not say the true condition changes. It just says that whether people 'come out' changes. Growing up with Klan parents won't stop you finding black girls attractive. But it will certainly prevent you taking them to the prom.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Actually I bet it would, as there'd be strong sociological and psychological influences from the environment to make you think like that.

 

Of course there's always exceptions.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hah! Fair enough. You'd need to get into mind-reading to know that one for sure.

 

I mean, aren't we missing something, which is that personality has a huge part to play in attraction. I know i can't be getting dates on my looks alone!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Don't be so hard on yourself.

 

Until we meet the person, I'd say that physical attractiveness is pretty paramount. I can't think of anybody that willingly went up to a person of the opposite sex that they felt was unattractive with the purpose of getting a date.

 

What can I say...we're all shallow :D

[metadigital]

...

I did list some of the health issues from homosexuality, but that got deleted. [1] I am just saying that homosexuals are more vulnerlable to AIDs [2], one of the biggest enemies of mankind. Homosexuality is not wrong, but unhealthy and not safe. If you disagree with that part, then list your evidences.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1.

2. Actually, the infection rates for homosexuals has stabilised. It is the hetrosexuals whose rate of HIV infection is accelerating ...

...

AIDS: The number of AIDS cases dropped 30 % and AIDS death rates dropped more than half between 1996 and 1998. Approximately 320,000 persons were living with AIDS in the year 2000. A convergence occurring between U.S. AIDS rates for males and females is due to increases in rates of HIV transmission through heterosexual sex and through injection drug use. An estimated 12,000 women became newly infected with HIV each year. ...

World Health Organisation pubished data for the US