FORUMS > All Things Gay Forum Rules

XXX-men

  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 19, 2008 11:27 PM GMT
    I would like to take a survey of everyone's thoughts on homosexuality. I'm NOT asking if it's a choice or not, I think it's safe to say it is not. I want to know if you guys think that it is biological, meaning it's a genetic mutation of some kind or perhaps an autonomic body response to certain environmental factors. Or, do you think it is psychological meaning that somehow certain people's brains get programed in early developmental stages to find the same sex more attractive. For the second one keep in mind that social constructions are very powerful and can determine how your brain works to a large extent. For example, slavery was partly a social construction that supported the belief that some races were inferior or less civilized. Clearly, standards for being civilized was a social construction affecting how people treated other races.

    I would argue either answer still suggests that homosexuality is spectrum behavioral trait like skin colour. There are degrees of same-sex attraction.

    What do you think?
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 12:22 AM GMT
    its natures way of attempting to curb the problem of over population..
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 12:25 AM GMT
    Homosexuality is statistically probable, empirically provable, and immensely enjoyable.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 12:27 AM GMT

    Biological.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 2:33 AM GMT
    see this..

    http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_1998/yax-096.htm

    hormonal influence.. while in utero.... "brain sex".. many theories.. not fully known yet.

    some even say due to pregnant mothers drinking water from bottled water ( chemical leaching into water,, afffecting fetal development ) , This was an FBI "secret" study. But i think they thought it causes hypospadia !

    No matter what -- it is good to be gay.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 3:04 AM GMT
    I dunno. But it's certainly irreversible.
  • gjoseph Posts: 250
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 3:20 AM GMT
    Biological!
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 3:58 AM GMT
    I remember reading a study somewhere, can't remember now, that theorised that homosexuality was in fact prevalent back in cave-men days.

    The theory went that certain male members of the cave tribe would have the duty to remain in the cave to protect the women and children whilst the others went out and hunted. This sub-set of cave man then went on to evolve into the homosexual.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 4:07 AM GMT
    Can it really be biological if the parents are straight?
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 4:24 AM GMT
    MuscleLuke saidCan it really be biological if the parents are straight?


    Can you have blue eyes if both your parents have brown?

    Yes. The recessive-dominant gene dance is more complex than that in actuality. What genes get passed on and activated on children is not as simple as 'like begets like'. Eye color heredity itself is already very complex and involves several genes. I imagine the homosexual 'genes', if there is one, would have an even more complex system of heredity, on when and how it will get activated.

    Plus, being 'biological' does not only mean genetic. It could also be hormonal as posted by kinkyzulu.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 4:30 AM GMT
    I think its biological...I remember being attracted to men at such a young age and I didn't even know what sex was then. I was definitely born this way.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 4:55 AM GMT
    I've heard it's something along the lines of hormonal influence as well.

    In a purely heterosexual male, testosterone works in the brain to make the female form sexually attractive. Not all male brains are equally affected by testosterone and some brains are completely unaffected by testosterone. Thus, a male whose brain is less affected by testosterone would be a varying degree of homosexual.( Kinsey 1-6)

    As to what exactly makes one brain more or less affected by testosterone, I have no idea...
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 4:59 AM GMT
    I know what I am, period!
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 5:17 AM GMT
    I think I'd rather not know what influences it. I like life being a chance. If orientation could be controlled what would happen to all the MILFs?
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 5:50 AM GMT
    I wonder if it's a mix of environmental and biological (genetic) factors, based on the set of studies already completed.

    I participated in a smell study developed by scientists at the Monell Institute, as a "gay study participant," back in 1999. I learned later that the scientists discovered that gay men reported smelling more variations in scents, like straight women...and that lesbian-identified women, smelled things in the same manner as straight men.

    Here are some other study findings on gay people...
    1. lesbians' earlobes are more often larger than average in comparison to heterosexual women
    2. gay men's scalp hair swirls in the opposite direction than the mean average of straight men
    3. a gay men's hypothalamus (part of the brain) is larger than a straight man's
    4. gay men's penises are, on average, larger, than heterosexual men
    5. gay men's index and fourth (ring) fingers are longer on average for equal sized straight men

    I've seen more studies and the evidence seems, in my view, to be mounting, that there are clear biological traits that are different between gay-identified people and non-gay people.
    Nevertheless, no study that I've found suggests that there is conclusive evidence that homosexuality is solely caused by genetic factors.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 5:57 AM GMT
    i sorta think it might be certain factors while in development (umm, this might be my neuroscience background). However, there are studies that seem to suggest its more genetic.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 5:59 AM GMT
    mutations, alterations, varieties of genetics occur all the time. These stick around and become part of the gene pool if they do not select themselves out.

    Homosexualilty could be self-promoting in the species because human tribes that had homosexuals did no worse or did better than tribes with no homosexuality. Having adults as part of a community who devote themselves to something other than child rearing can lead to developement of highly skilled craftsmen, scholars, and others which benefit society in general. Thus promoting the general health and increasing the likelyhood that the gays, their sisters, mothers, etc who carry the 'gay genes' might actually reproduce and have offspring that survive better then the straight tribe.


  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 6:10 AM GMT
    A professor at my university actually turned some friut flies gay with the introduction of certain hormones--well the males were attracted to each other. I have often thought about this. I have even heard that Homosexuality is natures way of "getting rid" of unfavorable genes. I'm not sticking my ding-dong anywhere near a woman! Thus, If I have unfavorable genes present in me--recessive of dominant alleles--they will "die" out with me. It's weird but if that were true, I'd feel more special for "taking one for the team"... the team being the human race of course. I have also heard a lot of stuff on homosexuality being linked to conditions in the mother's womb-- temperature, certain hormones present, the Rh factor etc.

    One thing Conservatives don't seem to understand... you can't just stop being attracted to a certain sex. How is that even possible? I also believe in the gay spectrum. I believe there are true bisexuals out their. There are even some women I wouldn't mind spending my life with... though our sex life would involve seperate fantasies, seperate beds... and a "no touchy rule"

    Ex-gays? Nope just gays forced back into the closet and/or people who were never truely gay/bi... just confused. Ex-ex-gays? Yep, gays shoved into the closet who then came out again after the crazy conservative talks didn't work.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 6:18 AM GMT
    Sedative said
    MuscleLuke saidCan it really be biological if the parents are straight?


    Can you have blue eyes if both your parents have brown?

    Yes. The recessive-dominant gene dance is more complex than that in actuality. What genes get passed on and activated on children is not as simple as 'like begets like'. Eye color heredity itself is already very complex and involves several genes. I imagine the homosexual 'genes', if there is one, would have an even more complex system of heredity, on when and how it will get activated.

    Plus, being 'biological' does not only mean genetic. It could also be hormonal as posted by kinkyzulu.


    YES! I was watching "Inspiration Network"--a Christian TV Channel-- one night (for shits and giggles... though I like to believ I "monitor" Christian TV... to see what they say/believe). Anyways, they had a commerical on that being gay is wrrong, and the liberals and scientists are lying because if being gay was genetic gay people wouldn't even exist since gays can't reproduce. So if gays can't reproduce, they can't pass on the gay gene.

    They made it SO simple and trashed genetics in only a few words. I was like WTF... now regular joes with no academic background will be convicenced that gays choose to be gay... that there is no gay gene. It was propaganda at best.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 6:23 AM GMT
    I think "ex-gays" are just men who fall somewhere from 1-4 along the Kinsey scale. They grow up being told they can grow out of it or that they can just pray it away and, when they can't, they just lie about it. Since they can, being attracted to both sexes in the first place.

    Guys who fall somewhere in the bisexual spectrum are also probably why the 'homo' gene, if any, is still present in the gene pool. Because the majority of men actually do swing both ways. (blah blah, Kinsey g0y stuff, blah, blah.)

    lol
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 8:29 AM GMT
    cjcscuba1984 said
    They made it SO simple and trashed genetics in only a few words. I was like WTF... now regular joes with no academic background will be convicenced that gays choose to be gay... that there is no gay gene. It was propaganda at best.


    Same reason why I get so infuriated with creationists. Heh. They can trash science in just a few choice words, pseudoscience, and distorted facts.

    I truly wonder at what the researchers behind whoever made those arguments are thinking. Because they probably knew all the facts but chose to keep only a few for their lies.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 9:00 AM GMT
    RyanReBoRn saidI think "ex-gays" are just men who fall somewhere from 1-4 along the Kinsey scale. They grow up being told they can grow out of it or that they can just pray it away and, when they can't, they just lie about it. Since they can, being attracted to both sexes in the first place.

    Guys who fall somewhere in the bisexual spectrum are also probably why the 'homo' gene, if any, is still present in the gene pool. Because the majority of men actually do swing both ways. (blah blah, Kinsey g0y stuff, blah, blah.)

    lol


    I don't know where I land on the Kinsey scale, but as an ex-ex-gay man, I can tell you that a) it's always been there and b) suppressing it only made me want it more.

    Otherwise, I can't add much to what has already been said, but I do believe it's nature and nurture.

    To liltanker's point, my sister posits the same hypothesis: homosexuality as population control...not that the world benefits from my homosexuality, given that I have fathered children.
  • Rowing_Ant Posts: 1370
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 9:04 AM GMT
    Oh yeah. dont get me started on that! I am an Archaeologist and I bloody well know Radio Carbon Dating, Dendrochronology and Potassium-Argon dating actually work, yet the Christians who give every other Christian a bad name are like "well actually no they dont work as the world was created in 4004BC, the Bible says so" (um no a chap caleld Archsbishop Usher counted back generations he found in the Bible - remember Methusela lived a few hundred years 'in the bible'. - and worked out the date of a Monday in October 4004BC) and that they point out that Radio Carbon "doesnt work" because when it was first developed it gave out all sorts of wierd cranky dates, but after it was Calibrated using Dendrochronology it works just fine. But all they can do is point to the early 1950s when RC14 was being developed and say "it doesnt work, you can't trust these pseudo Scientists who are destroying the Bible".

    Again the same goes with Homosexuality; theyve got a book of special words which tells them everything they need to know. Which is why Christians burned the greatest library in the Ancient World in Alexandria as they had the Bible and all those books were pagan and therefore somehow wrong.

    They utterly utterly beleive homosexuals chose to be gay and that choice is wrong. An "abomination" - mind you so too is eating prawns, wearing mixed fibre clothing and touching the skin of adead pig and you dont see Christians doing any of that appart from being Homophobic. Their understanding on homosexuality is based on the writing of St Paul 2,000 years ago when the understanding of the world was a lot differant. Science has moved on quite a substantial chunk since then but those groups have not. Or want to reverse science to those levels of "humours" and drilling holes in peoples heads to cure headaches. If someone belives something so utterly you will never, ever, make them change their views. You could fill a Howitzer with all the data showing how homosexuals are born, its natural etc and they would ignore it because they have their little book of words. Its that simple

    Id day ignore themn...but its when they start getting into Schools, Media, Government that problems start.
  • metalxracr Posts: 761
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 9:04 AM GMT
    I don't ever know what to come up with for this kind of question. I remember being a very small kid and being attracted to guys. I was born in '86 and the funny thing is I remember being strongly attracted to George Michael! HAAA!! I also had the hots for John Stamos in Full House... still do!!

    But I see it as taste. I would always explain this to my friends in high school. I would ask them, "Why do you like Dr. Pepper over Coke, did you ever choose to like one more than the other?" Also it's the aesthetic appeal. Why do you favor one color over another, or one shirt over another. It's just a matter of taste. And for me that explained bi-sexuals and those supposed, "straight guys" that have had a few flings here and there.

    For instance, I hated spinach! many don't like it, others love it, some don't mind it. To me it was an acquired taste, now I love it! I see sexuality the same way.


  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Dec 20, 2008 9:43 AM GMT
    If it could be proved scientifically that we are gay because of biological or genetic influences then the homophobes could no longer condemn us for our 'choice', right? Many people hope for this.

    But far more likely is the terrifying reality that homphobes will wipe us out if they could find a way - through these very biological or genetic discoveries. After all, they'l still view us as sick and unholy.

    Imagine the dilemna facing a fresh-faced xtian fundie - either abort or deal with a baby that turns out gay.... more scary if it is just a matter of gene manipulation and they just prevent us from ever being conceived.

    Even parents who would have loved and supported a gay child might - if they had the option - prefer to have straight children. If my parents had been given the choice would I be here? There's a movie called 'Twilight of the Golds' that covers this issue. Check it out.