[budster101]

True-dat. (Bitchy as a woman)

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Athens

Bi guys on the other hand are generally sane.

You mean other than being terminally indecisive?

Originally Posted by Johnnyboysmac

I seriously wonder, if there is evidence as tooki points out of many gays having mental health problems, whether there is correlation between this, and the way they are treated by the majority of folks i.e. rejection, ridicule, denigration, ostracisation etc..one only has to look at the evidence of the 'loving' right wing Christian fanatics here to see evidence of that unfortunately.

Indeed. While my comment was sort of intended tongue-in-cheek, like most stereotypes it's based in reality. It would be very interesting to try and see if causality could be established between gays' nuttiness and treatment.

(Another thing I think would be a fascinating study would be to try and find correlations for and causes of the gay accent. Not only does this accent come up in individuals who've had little or no contact to other gays, it's also not a female speech pattern. Where does it come from? What explains the differences in the degree to which different gay men use it? etc...)

tooki

[Warung]

Originally Posted by budster101

Show me where in nature this occurs. I can find many where the male and female stay together for life.

Oh really? "For life"...well in some cases the "life" of the male is rather short after procreation.

Good.

a) You already mentioned other primates which exhibit homosexual behaviour (a totally valid example), penguins, dogs, cats, and many other mammals exihibit same "sex behaviour".

b) Of course you had to throw in the little spin of "staying together for life", since you know very well that homosexuality occurs throughout nature. Unfortunately, for you, monogamous behavior is VERY rare, and human beings are among the few species which practice it.

c) Sexual behavior is (just like everything else in nature) a direct result of the evolutionary process. If monogamy allows for a successful continuation of a species, then it is monogamy. If a-sexual reproduction is what works best, then it's that. And if it is a mixture of monogamous hetero sexual reproduction and some homosexual behavior, well...then that will be the way.

That's why you will never get a species which is 100% homosexual (unless nature came up with another way to procreate under such circumstances).

d) So yes, homosexuality is completely natural. Just like monogamy and heterosexuality. Normal? Well, if you look at the bigger picture, of course it is.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Warung

Oh really? "For life"...well in some cases the "life" of the male is rather short after procreation.

The best example has to be Wendell and Cass, the gay penguins at the New York Aquarium in Coney Island. They're a dedicated, monogamous pair, having been a couple for over 10 years now.

http://www.jrn.columbia.edu/studentw...-06-10/591.asp

tooki

[budster101]

So it's ok to emulate Dogs, Cats, Penguins, and monkies right?.... That's normal. You can't win here, you know that right?

[tooki]

No, the point is that homosexuality isn't limited to humans, an argument frequently made by the anti-gay crowd despite tons of evidence to the contrary.

tooki

[Warung]

Originally Posted by deomacius

I was conditioned to be heterosexual. Just like I was conditioned to prefer light skinned women over dark skinned women or redheads over brunettes or blonds...

Then how do you explain people being attracted to the same sex without any prior knowledge of, or contact with, other homosexuals?

[Warung]

Originally Posted by budster101

So it's ok to emulate Dogs, Cats, Penguins, and monkies right?.... That's normal. You can't win here, you know that right?

LOL, nice try. It has nothing to do with "emulation" though.

Funny though, that you should feel "justified" when emulating the "norm". Very telling.

[deomacius]

Originally Posted by Warung

Then how do you explain people being attracted to the same sex without any prior knowledge of, or contact with, other homosexuals?

Do you know every facet of every gay person's life growing up? Can you possibly know what affect ANYTHING had on how that person turned out? I guess a nice blunt canned response might be "no father figure or a masculine mother"? Who knows?

[Warung]

Originally Posted by deomacius

Do you know every facet of every gay person's life growing up? Can you possibly know what affect ANYTHING had on how that person turned out?

Well, you'd have to have some common external factor that all homosexuals have encountered.

Yet, all different types of cultures, peoples and communities throughout history have had gay members. Rural areas, cities, towns...rich people, poor people...single parents, children from monogamous couples...all there.

So, what could it be? Maybe it's the combination of seeing the color red on a 23rd of december after eating a piece of bread and washing your hair the next day...

[deomacius]

Originally Posted by Warung

So, what could it be? Maybe it's the combination of seeing the color red on a 23rd of december after eating a piece of bread and washing your hair the next day...

Yes, I can see it now!

But seriously, what is the common link between guys that prefer one fetish over another? I just don't think you can put a finger on that sort of thing. Not easily anyway.

[Warung]

Originally Posted by deomacius

I just don't think you can put a finger on that sort of thing. Not easily anyway.

I think it's especially tough since it's most likely a combination of things (it is already scientifically proven that genetic predisposion at least plays a deciding role).

But regardless, in all cases it is a prefernce and very "instinctual" behavior (I have never heard any credible story where somebody is actually "turned" gay) and since in the process of living out this instinct nobody gets "hurt", I don't think you could consider it pathological, or "wrong" (my definition, I know )

[wallinbl]

Originally Posted by Warung

Then how do you explain people being attracted to the same sex without any prior knowledge of, or contact with, other homosexuals?

Because all men really want is a place to put their dicks (see http://www.homemade-sex-toys.com/). If you would put your dick in a woman's ass, then why not a man's ass? Men just want to have sex. That's probably the best thing about being gay is that the people you're trying to have sex with are as eager as you (unlike women, who seem to only have a mild interest).


As to some post above about the "prevalence" of homosexuality in nature: prevalence is the wrong word. It happens, but not often enough to use the word prevalent. Besides, occurrence in nature is not a useful argument. There are plenty of evolutionary mistakes; some have killed off species.

Let's hope it's not genetic. If it does reach prevalence in humans, the population will dwindle.

[lavar78]

Originally Posted by wallinbl

If it does reach prevalence in humans, the population will dwindle.

Who will be the first to make the oh-so-obvious remark?

[wolfen]

Originally Posted by Warung

(I have never heard any credible story where somebody is actually "turned" gay)

This is long, but there's a point.

There is strong evidence that sexuality is malleable for many (if not most) people. You can condition people to enjoy things that they wouldn't otherwise enjoy. If they're not morally conditioned against something, it makes it that much easier to experiment. How do you think you get someone who doesn't enjoy a particular position or style to eventually enjoy the hell out of itl? Experimentation happens in bedrooms around the world every day.

"Just give it a chance, honey...you might really enjoy it." And it turns out, some really do! it could be toys, it could be role play, whatever. This implies that the malleability of sexual enjoyment is simply more or less malleable in a person -- but rarely fixed.

It is against scientific ethics to see just how true this is. It's wrong to condition childrens' approaches to sexuality. So the data on "Can a gay experience influence orientation?" must be collected from naturally occuring correlations. For example, twins of opposite sexual orientation where the gay one says "well, I had a homosexual experience when I was young" -- you can't conclusively state anything about this. But enough of these examples can provide evidence for a causal relationship. It's still not proof -- it will always be evidence only.

The argument among many Christians is that enough pro-homosexual messages (or advances) aimed at their kids can have an effect on their child's openness to the experience. This is not inconsistent with the facts -- it's a reasonable expectation that the more you say "This is good" the more likely a kid is to accept it. Experimentation -- or even simply not resisting an advance -- is not much of a leap from there.

THAT's when the question becomes relevant -- could this experience lead to a lifelong PREFERENCE for homosexuality in someone who would have otherwise developed as a happy heterosexual? The odds are that for some people the answer is yes. At the very least it's likely that a number of them would become bisexual.

My own experience is this: I have gay and lesbian friends. An inordinate # of them were sexually abused or had a sexual experience well before they were prepared for it. We don't talk about "do you think this affected your orientation" ... but it seems likely that it did. But I also have gay friends who never had such an experience and who are convicted that they always gay.

I think it's sad that gays cannot discuss these things in a free manner with the "outside world." It immediately polarizes them against all the people who will claim they are simply victims and unnatural. This avoids the fact that EVERYONE is more malleable than they want to believe. Therefore a fixed notion of sexuality is more akin to mental illness (delusional) than a mind open to the realities of its true sexual nature.

[Kerrigan]

I don't quite follow the logic. The same people saying that homosexuality is a disorder are also saying that it is a choice. How could you choose to have a disorder?

"I've seen so many heartburn sufferers portrayed in film and television that am now going to choose to have heartburn myself".

The truth is that sexuality, like so many other things in life, is neither a choice nor a predetermined part of you. You get what life gives you out, and you choose how to deal with it.

There are those who are thrown into homosexuality by circumstance, while others choose to be gay because of the thrill of doing something forbidden by society. But by and large, most people are gay simply because that's the way they are, they've given it plenty of thought and realised that they are better off leading a gay lifestyle.

Whatever the reason, just let gays get on with their lives. They don't need people pointing fingers and saying that they have a disorder, because when you look closely enough, all people have some aspect of their lives, hidden or not, which could be classified as abnormal.

[CreepingDeth]

Originally Posted by lavar78

Who will be the first to make the oh-so-obvious remark?

Timeist!

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

There are those who are thrown into homosexuality by circumstance, while others choose to be gay because of the thrill of doing something forbidden by society.

That is, far and away, the most absurd thing I've heard of in a damned long time. I have never, ever, heard of a single gay person ever being gay for that reason. Quite the contrary, most gay people try to deny it at first, and many would choose to be straight if they could.

But for the thrill of doing something forbidden? That's patent nonsense. There's no evidence for that at all.

tooki

[Kerrigan]

I hate to play this card, but it seems necessary: I am gay. I have known a number of guys who have gotten involved in gay relationships because it is exciting to do something "different". When they are done experimenting, they go back to being straight.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that a lot of people will try things simply because they are taboo. Homosexuality is no exception here.

[deomacius]

Originally Posted by wolfen

This is long, but there's a point.

There is strong evidence that sexuality is malleable for many... {snip}

Spot on!

[torsoboy]

Originally Posted by Oisín

No, actually, that's pretty much the opposite of what I was saying (and I don't get how you managed to extract that from my post).

What I was saying is that there is a difference between being a paedophile or homosexual—something that you are born with, and cannot change, in my belief—and acting out on your tendencies towards either paedophilia or homosexuality, exactly because you can control your actions, but not your mental/emotional processes.

As far as I know, most paedophiles are actually terrified of themselves, full of self-loathing, and deeply regret being paedophiles, using enormous amounts of mental energy on preventing themselves from ever acting out on whatever it is in their brains that causes them to be sexually attracted to children. It's only a minority of paedophiles that accept their paedophilia and choose to act on it. (Don't take this 'statistic' at face value, though; I believe I have this information from some documentary shown on TV a while back, so it may be grossly incorrect)

In my opinion, it is only the second group of paedophiles that deserve punishment for their actions. The fact that the first group is sexually attracted to children is not something they can control, no matter how much they try. They can (and do), however, control whether they act on these impulses, and the fact that they choose not to act on them tells me they shouldn't be punished. Therapy would probably be a good thing, but there's no need to punish them for something they can't control.

My point was not that people don't have a choice in their acts—they do, most certainly—but rather that choosing to act on homosexual impulses is, in most societies nowadays, not illegal, not frowned upon (much), and not completely discouraged. Acting on paedophiliac impulses, however, is, and that is why the by now very old and worn homosexuality–paedophilia comparison is not a valid one.

Edit: Damn, I wasn't going to post in this thread again. Arck.

Excellent post. I deffinatly agree with this. Most of us have some craving/yearning that we try to resist for a very long time... when/if we give in, it doesn't make it okay just because we were "born with" the feelings.

[Superchicken]

Originally Posted by tooki

That is, far and away, the most absurd thing I've heard of in a damned long time. I have never, ever, heard of a single gay person ever being gay for that reason. Quite the contrary, most gay people try to deny it at first, and many would choose to be straight if they could.

But for the thrill of doing something forbidden? That's patent nonsense. There's no evidence for that at all.

tooki

I haven't heard of many guys doing this, but I've seen a fair number of girls say they were lesbian or more commonly bi just because it was something to say or do at the time. I don't know many guys though that are terribly willing to risk the stigma of being gay, though I imagine there are a few who will.

[Superchicken]

You know... this doesn't seem to be quite as bad of a flame war as I was expecting Though I've only skim read this last page.

[deomacius]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

I don't quite follow the logic. The same people saying that homosexuality is a disorder are also saying that it is a choice. How could you choose to have a disorder?

I hope you aren't lumping ME in with people you think are calling it a disorder. I believe it to be a choice, not a disorder. Not anymore than other other thing I believe to be wrong that some people choose to do.

"I've seen so many heartburn sufferers portrayed in film and television that am now going to choose to have heartburn myself".

Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaching!

The truth is that sexuality, like so many other things in life, is neither a choice nor a predetermined part of you. You get what life gives you out, and you choose how to deal with it.

Let's say I like art (not the guy, before anyone says it. ) . No specific events in my life gave me a mild desire to be an artist. Now, it's up to me whether I nurture and explore that curiosity or look past it and get a real job. There is a choice involved.

[/QUOTE]There are those who are thrown into homosexuality by circumstance, while others choose to be gay because of the thrill of doing something forbidden by society. But by and large, most people are gay simply because that's the way they are, they've given it plenty of thought and realised that they are better off leading a gay lifestyle.[/QUOTE]

They've given it lot's of thought and decided that "by gosh, I don't care what people think! I'm gonna do what I like doing"! My real objection is that people won't acknowledge it for what it is, a choice. Stop trying to justify it. Stop saying you were born that way and just say that you thoroughly enjoy that experience and that lifestyle and be done with it.

Whatever the reason, just let gays get on with their lives. They don't need people pointing fingers and saying that they have a disorder, because when you look closely enough, all people have some aspect of their lives, hidden or not, which could be classified as abnormal.

Indeed, no one is perfect. The difference is, I don't look at my imperfections as genetic anomalies that I must resign myself to. I see them as choices that need to be learned from and improved.

[Kerrigan]

For example, look at Zimphire. Growing up in the hills of West Virginia, Zimphire has always been told how wrong and evil homosexuality is by his parents, friends, and religious mentors. But thanks to the anonymity of MacNN, he can experience the thrill of being close to that strange desire which he craves so, namely SWF.

This is why he has created an elaborate web of false screen names, all centered around the goal of getting ever closer to SWF. But will he ever actually consummate this lust? will he ever break the hard candy shell of his desire and taste the sweet chocolately centre? Probably not. But the possiblity always exists, and he gets a rush from it.

;-)

[deomacius]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

will he ever break the hard candy shell of his desire and taste the sweet chocolately centre?

Ohh...bbb....I'm nauseous!! I'll never get that image out of my head now!!

[Oisín]

(I knew it. I just knew I'd end up posting in this thread again. Damn! But well, at least, as you said, it's not nearly as much of a flame war as I'd expected it to become; plus I'm stepping nimbly around the flame war areas of the thread)

Originally Posted by Superchicken

I haven't heard of many guys doing this, but I've seen a fair number of girls say they were lesbian or more commonly bi just because it was something to say or do at the time. I don't know many guys though that are terribly willing to risk the stigma of being gay, though I imagine there are a few who will.

Indeed there are. It depends a lot on where you are, both in terms of geography, and stages of life. A few of my friends in high school actually thought initially that I was just claiming to be gay in order to be cool, because in their nonsense-humour-worshipping circle (the less sense it made, the more fun it was; the more outrageous and ridiculous it was, the cooler it was; full of positive vibes, but completely bizarre in every way), being gay was pretty much the ultimate in coolness.

So yeah, some guys actually do experiment with gay relation(ship)s just because it's the cool thing to do in their circle.

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by deomacius

They've given it lot's of thought and decided that "by gosh, I don't care what people think! I'm gonna do what I like doing"!

That might fit some, but I suspect not most.

I never gave it lots (not lot's, dammit, btw ) of thought—in fact, I never really gave it any thought. I've known for as long as I can remember that it just would not make any sense in my mind to find women sexually attractive (I have specific memories of being consciously aware of this before the age of 5).

If I had to give anything lots of thought and consideration and make a choice accordingly, it would have to be being straight, not being gay. I've never considered heterosexuality as an option for myself for more than fleeting moments, 'cause I've never had any kind of doubts that there was just nothing there for me. It's not even like I'm trying to avoid it, it's just... well, boring, I guess is the best word I can think of to describe it...

My real objection is that people won't acknowledge it for what it is, a choice. Stop trying to justify it. Stop saying you were born that way and just say that you thoroughly enjoy that experience and that lifestyle and be done with it.

I was born this way. I'm not trying to justify anything; if anything, calling it a choice would call for more justification than calling it something I'm born with. Sure, I can now say that I “thoroughly enjoy that experience”, but as I said above, I was fully aware of being gay at a time when I barely knew what 'that experience' was, and when my lifestyle consisted mainly of playing in sandboxes and making a mess of eating ice cream. I did not make any kind of conscious choice to be gay, I just accepted what my brain was telling me: that my eyes wander towards other guys' asses, not girls' asses.

Who you find attractive, which things excite or un-excite (whatever the opposite of 'excite' is) you is not something you have any kind of control over, and it can thus never be a choice.

[deomacius]

Originally Posted by Oisín

(not lot's, dammit, btw )

Just another case of my fingers being faster than my brain.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by tooki

(Another thing I think would be a fascinating study would be to try and find correlations for and causes of the gay accent. Not only does this accent come up in individuals who've had little or no contact to other gays, it's also not a female speech pattern. Where does it come from? What explains the differences in the degree to which different gay men use it? etc...)

tooki

This has been a quandary of mine for quite a while as well.

RR.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by chris v

You know what? This forum is full of insecure, whiney pathetic little people. I recall a time when not every thread here degenerated into name-calling, and horrid displays of ignorance and prejucdice. I miss those days.

You're killing me here!

[deomacius]

Originally Posted by Oisín

Who you find attractive, which things excite or un-excite (whatever the opposite of 'excite' is) you is not something you have any kind of control over, and it can thus never be a choice.

Oisín,

I respect your opinion. I also appreciate your calm, cool manner in discussing all of this (and everyone else who refrained from flaming ). I think I'm gonna call a draw on this one. I'm sure you could come back with as many responses as I could. At some point someone has to step back and say "this is going in circles".

I think we can both agree that everyone has a right to choose to live how they want to live. No one has the right to condemn another person for that choice if it affects no one else.

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by deomacius

Oisín,

I respect your opinion. I also appreciate your calm, cool manner in discussing all of this (and everyone else who refrained from flaming ).

Likewise

I think I'm gonna call a draw on this one. I'm sure you could come back with as many responses as I could. At some point someone has to step back and say "this is going in circles".

Probably a good idea. Save a lot of unnecessary back-and-forthing for nothing.

I think we can both agree that everyone has a right to choose to live how they want to live. No one has the right to condemn another person for that choice if it affects no one else.

Yep—and that's the most important thing.

[lavar78]

Originally Posted by Oisín

Who you find attractive, which things excite or un-excite (whatever the opposite of 'excite' is) you is not something you have any kind of control over, and it can thus never be a choice.

Not to prolong the discussion or anything, but I wholeheartedly agree with this. You don't choose to be attracted to someone; either you are or you aren't.

[wolfen]

Originally Posted by lavar78

Not to prolong the discussion or anything, but I wholeheartedly agree with this. You don't choose to be attracted to someone; either you are or you aren't.

I respect Oisin, etc. but I do not agree with this. The real issue at heart is not whether or not a person can control their attraction, but whether or not that is what they ARE doing.

The mind is a powerful thing. There are limits, but the more willing you are the more powerful yours can be. You can definitely, without question, alter your level of attraction to someone. The limits of that process are related to where you're willing to start.

I am not saying that 8 year old boys with gay inclinations are making a conscious choice to BE gay. I'm simply saying that anyone can work themselves into getting attracted to someone that didn't initially excite them. For some people this is an unnatural thing to do, others can't relate to it. But it can be done.

I do not support the idea that gays generally choose to be attracted to the same sex. But it does happen -- and they CAN choose to be attracted to females if they really want to. But I do not agree that doing so is the moral high ground. And obviously some people have stronger minds than others.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

I hate to play this card, but it seems necessary: I am gay. I have known a number of guys who have gotten involved in gay relationships because it is exciting to do something "different". When they are done experimenting, they go back to being straight.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that a lot of people will try things simply because they are taboo. Homosexuality is no exception here.

Yes, it is: having sex with a guy a couple of times doesn't make you gay. Being attracted to someone of the same sex is what makes you gay.

Homosexuality isn't just about sex; heck, it's probably not about sex at all. It's about who you are attracted to.

tooki

[SimpleLife]

Originally Posted by tooki

Homosexuality isn't just about sex; heck, it's probably not about sex at all. It's about who you are attracted to.

tooki

And nothing else.

[Superchicken]

Ahh the joys of having a discussion about homosexuality. Is being gay having sex with guys? Is it wanting to have sex with guys? Is it noticing another guy has a nice butt? Is it about having an internal desire to have sex with guys and embracing that and acting on it?

Honestly... some days I'm tempted to make a scale out of ten and just use that in discussions whether or not people know what I'm talking about.

Billy is Gay1 he has sex with guys all the time and really likes that aspect of himself and has highlights in his hair, the whole shebang.
Bobby is only Gay8, he tried it once, kind of wants to again, but at the same time really doesn't want to.
SWG is Gay.00001 and so on...

[CreepingDeth]

Hmm…it seems that women are a lot more open to doing it with their best friend than men are. Example: porn.

Anyone remember than one Ron White joke about his homophobic friend?

[Scientist]

Originally Posted by budster101

Ok, so then...

Where in nature is it normal? You mean when monkies who throw their feces, have butt-buddies?
Show me where in nature it is normal.

You are proving my point.
I used the "BTK Killer" example and you use "The Middle Ages and Nobility".

We all know, well most of us, that those things were and are not normal... hence my conclusion as The Act of Being Gay is not normal in Human Society and is a devient behavior. I'm just thinking logically, and not emotionally, because if I were to be emotional about the topic, I would be upset at the comparisons. I don't hate people who are homosexuals. Only the few who have exhibited some strong anti-social behaviors, but in general of course not.

One cannot justify the behavior of a homosexual in sexual terms. There is nothing in nature where two males or two females live together and stay together for life... It doesn't happen.

There are instances where the male comes and donates his sperm, then leaves the female to be on her own and raise the "family"... that's devient as well in a way, but the male moves on and procreates again and again for the sake of the species. We have other luxuries that allow us to not have to do this.

Show me where in nature this occurs. I can find many where the male and female stay together for life.

Warung correctly pointed out most of what is wrong with this post. I would like to add that the concept of "for the sake of the species" is a myth. See the following article if you are interested.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_selection

Homosexuality does occur in nature, however I don't think it evolved directly. My guess is that homosexuality is the result of exposure to environments which differ from those in which the mechanisms of sexual identity development evolved. In this way it is much like adoption which is also maladaptive and also occurs occassionally in humans and nature.

If this idea is correct we would expect species to exibit a frequency of homosexuality that correlates positively with the degree that their current environment differs from that of their recent evolutionary history. Most (all?) humans today are raised in environments that differ greatly from those in which they evolved. Community size, social interactions, cultural norms, disease exposure, workload, diet, etc all combine to make humans some of the most "out-of-place" animals on the planet. We also appear to have a very high incidence of homosexuality compared to other species. For similar reasons I would expect pets and zoo animals to have higher proportions of homosexual individuals.

I am also aware of an unpublished study on homosexuality in ducks. Ducks (one species at least) can be raised to exhibit exclusive homosexual behavior if raised in a specific way. I don't recall the details of how this was done.

Meme theorist Susan Blackmoor has an interesting (and I suppose obvious) idea which may help to explain the prevelence of homosexuality in humans. She posits that the very cultural stigmas against homosexuality that homosexuals resist may have prevented evolution away from these maladaptive traits. This is because many homosexual members of past societies presumably bowed to social pressure by starting families and producing children. In this way their fitness relative to their neighbors may not have been significantly impaired allowing the genes to persist in the population. Compare this to other animals that do not have a mechanism to counter the evolutionary change away from homosexuality that may occur when a species' developmental environment changes. Ironically the burgeoning acceptance of homosexual lifestyles may start to reduce the size of future populations of homosexuals because they will have fewer children. In a way the intellectual ancestors of today's homophobes made widespread homosexuality possible while its supporters today may be inadvertently eliminating it. Of course egg and sperm donations may counteract this.

Some scientists, like respected sociobiologist E.O. Wilson believe homosexual behavior is an adaptive trait. I find these arguments to be pretty weak, but I thought I'd throw the possibility out there.

So in summary I suspect that homosexuality is genetic in that members of society have differing levels of genetic predisposition towards developing into homosexuality individuals. It did not evolve directly and is not adaptive. I suspect that there is little a homosexual person can do to change their desires. In other words it is not a choice.

I'm probably wrong about most of this. This is just the best mental model I have come up with given my limited experience with the matter.

[Superchicken]

Originally Posted by CreepingDeth

Hmm…it seems that women are a lot more open to doing it with their best friend than men are. Example: porn.

Anyone remember than one Ron White joke about his homophobic friend?

I dono... the girl I've been hanging out with and I are really close... and I don't think either of us really wanna hop in the sack... oh wait you meant with another guy... ewww have you seen my best guy friend!? I should hope I could do better than that!

[wallinbl]

Originally Posted by Superchicken

I dono... the girl I've been hanging out with and I are really close... and I don't think either of us really wanna hop in the sack... oh wait you meant with another guy... ewww have you seen my best guy friend!? I should hope I could do better than that!

Have you seen Ron White? I don't think he could do very well!

"I've seen so many heartburn sufferers portrayed in film and television that am now going to choose to have heartburn myself".

Actually, this happens. It's not a conscious thing, but the mind is incredibly powerful and can bring on medical conditions. I'm simply pointing this out, and not relating it to the discussion on homosexuality.

There is strong evidence that sexuality is malleable for many (if not most) people. You can condition people to enjoy things that they wouldn't otherwise enjoy.

Get sentenced to life in prison, and you will condition yourself to have sex with what's around you - men.

[budster101]

Don't quote Wikipedia as a source... it's not really kosher, but it did raise an eyebrow of interest.

[Kerrigan]

As I said in my original posting, I believe that the vast majority of gay people are unable to control their desires. There are of course some who have probably "chosen" to be gay for the various reasons, or who have become conditioned to be gay, but they are greatly outnumbered by people who are genuinely gay.

When a person decides to "come out" or announce their homosexuality, people should just leave it at that and not look for any further reasons. When people pry around for reasons, they are likely to just end up with loads of unanswered questions.

Luckily, judging by the way this thread has gone up to this point, I think people here are beginning to realise that whatever the reason behind homosexuality, people should allow gays to get on with their own lives and not have to worry about whether or not they are violating some ancient taboo.

[budster101]

My cousin came out at his parents 50th Wedding Anniversary. He's a classless clown and it was idiotic. I do think there is something wrong with him besides his homosexuality though.

Of course, I have to add this so I'm not misunderstood as to be a gay-hater. It doesn't bother me that one chooses another for life so much as so many of the gay population seem to be quite off their rockers...

As a graphic designer I deal with quite a few gay people, and in my humble oppinion, many of them are bitches beyond what I've experienced with women... not far, but enough...

I'm pretty happy this thread has lasted as long as it has, and has sturred a bit of interest. My initial intention was to be tongue-in-cheeky, but since a serious conversation has been the result with hardly any one getting upset or personal, carry on.

[Kerrigan]

It's true, a lot of gay men who work in design, fashion, and beauty careers are self-hating bitches

I know this is a stereotype, but if anyone thinks it isn't true, go set up a hair appointment with the nearest overweight male hairdresser

[Johnnyboysmac]

Hmm

Despite all the well reasoned 'arguments' (and yes, for once it seems a relatively flame free thread) something just strikes me as a little odd re the entire premise.

Why don't we turn the discussion around.

Hence, is heterosexuality a mental disorder?

Lets look at the reasons for being heterosexual.

For those who argue that homosexuality is a choice, may I ask at what stage in your life, you CONSCIOUSLY made a choice to be heterosexual?

Were you somehow 'aware' of desires that could take you in either a gay or straight direction, and hence you made a choice, or is it just because you are straight?

Surely to choose, you would have to have an option, or options, and be aware of them?

If not, i.e. being straight is just 'who you are' may we do some case studies or be presented with empirical evidence to further our understanding as to what is the causation of folks to become straight, i.e genetics, social conditioning, or choice?

I aks a serious question, because, no doubt some of you (mostly straight) will think it absurb.

The point is this; it is only because some folks have a set view (for whatever reason - mostly religious it would appear) that gay, or being gay is wrong, that we have these sorts of discussions/arguments as to causation/choice etc re gay people.

Why do we not question heterosexuality in the same manner?

Because the same mainly religious people who rant, rave, tear out their hair, and generally give gay folks a hard time, have a religious or other dogma that tells them gay is wrong, therefore they have/need to 'pull it apart' to try and figure it out IMHO, so as to justify their point of view - especially if they can argue it is a choice, as of course, then it neatly fits within religious dogma - as being 'unnatural' 'sin' etc, etc.

So, I ask, those of you who are straight, and arguing that homosexuality is a choice; at what point did you CONCIOUSLY CHOOSE to be heterosexual?

I await your personal comments/experiences with interest.

Cheers

John...

[Warung]

Originally Posted by wolfen

There is strong evidence that sexuality is malleable for many (if not most) people. You can condition people to enjoy things that they wouldn't otherwise enjoy. If they're not morally conditioned against something, it makes it that much easier to experiment. How do you think you get someone who doesn't enjoy a particular position or style to eventually enjoy the hell out of itl? Experimentation happens in bedrooms around the world every day.

Interesting point. But I think you are confusing two very different aspects here.

One, is how open you actually are to different "ways of having sex" and "willingness to experiment", - the other is "who you are attracted to".

While I would agree that the first is rather "malleable", the second one, dealing with a GENERAL preference is something distinctly different.

Again, I don't know a single person, or have ever heard of a single case, where somebody who had previously not been attracted to a person of the same sex, was all of a sudden coerced, persuaded or forced (unless they were in the slammer) into having homosexual "urges".

That's why "putting your dick in a man's ass", as one poster here so eloquently put it, is NOT the same as doing it with a women.

The only time this could actually play a role is if a person was truly split up the middle (bi-sexual) and wasn't sure which direction to go in (or simply not comfortable with having sex with both men and women). But afaik, most people fall pretty solidly (save the uncertainties from external/societal pressure) into one category or the other.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by tooki

You mean other than being terminally indecisive?



tooki

Actually I like to think of us as greedy, dipping both hands into both pans of the pie face it we bi's have the best of both worlds and double the selection hehe

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Warung

Then how do you explain people being attracted to the same sex without any prior knowledge of, or contact with, other homosexuals?

Because its hard wired biological feelings, the same feelings men get that are atracted to woman. Let u in on a secret. The first couple of guys I had a crush on when I was a teen where straight guys not gay. I still had crushes on them.