[QUOTE=limulus54;32596930]is this sarcasm?[/QUOTE]
what?
no. it's really well studied.
[QUOTE=farmatyr;32595089]It's against human nature.[/QUOTE]
Haha what the fuck!
Homosexuals feel attracted to the same sex in the same way that you feel attracted to the opposite sex.
We're humans, and millions of people have this attraction to the same sex, so it infact IS in human nature.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;32597411]what?
no. it's really well studied.[/QUOTE]
So, you're saying there actually are biological differences in people who have a purely psychological trait?
I really doubt it, however well studied it may be.
[QUOTE=limulus54;32597607]So, you're saying there actually are biological differences in people who have a purely psychological trait?
I really doubt it, however well studied it may be.[/QUOTE]
Ok? you're wrong, especially with the brain. hormones are obviously at very different levels and they even emit different odors because of these differences.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation#Studies_of_brain_structure[/url]
also:
[quote]Physiological
Some studies have found correlations between physiology of people and their sexuality. These studies provide evidence which they claim suggests that:
Gay men report, on an average, slightly longer and thicker penises than non-gay men.[51]
Gay men and straight women have, on average, equally proportioned brain hemispheres. Lesbian women and straight men have, on average, slightly larger right brain hemispheres.[52]
The VIP SCN nucleus of the hypothalamus is larger in men than in women, and larger in gay men than in heterosexual men.[53]
The average size of the INAH-3 in the brains of gay men is approximately the same size as INAH 3 in women, which is significantly smaller, and the cells more densely packed, than in heterosexual men's brains.[28]
The anterior commissure is larger in women than men and was reported to be larger in gay men than in non-gay men,[27] but a subsequent study found no such difference.[54]
Gay men's brains respond differently to fluoxetine, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.[55]
The functioning of the inner ear and the central auditory system in lesbians and bisexual women are more like the functional properties found in men than in non-gay women (the researchers argued this finding was consistent with the prenatal hormonal theory of sexual orientation).[56]
The suprachiasmatic nucleus was found by Swaab and Hopffman to be larger in gay men than in non-gay men,[57] the suprachiasmatic nucleus is also known to be larger in men than in women.[58]
The startle response (eyeblink following a loud sound) is similarly masculinized in lesbians and bisexual women.[59]
Gay and non-gay people's brains respond differently to two putative sex pheromones (AND, found in male armpit secretions, and EST, found in female urine).[24][60][61]
One region of the brain (amygdala) is more active in gay men than non-gay men when exposed to sexually arousing material.[62]
Finger length ratios between the index and ring fingers may be different between non-gay and lesbian women.[56][63][64][65][66][67]
Gay men and lesbians are significantly more likely to be left-handed or ambidextrous than non-gay men and women;[68][69][70] Simon LeVay argues that because "[h]and preference is observable before birth[71]... [t]he observation of increased non-right-handness in gay people is therefore consistent with the idea that sexual orientation is influenced by prenatal processes," perhaps heredity.[28]
A study of 50 gay men found 23% had counterclockwise hair whirl, as opposed to 8% in the general population. This may correlate with left-handedness.[72]
Gay men have increased ridge density in the fingerprints on their left thumbs and pinkies.[72]
Length of limbs and hands of gay men is smaller compared to height than the general population, but only among white men.[72]
[edit]Cognitive
Recent studies suggest the presence of subtle differences in the way gay people and non-gay people process certain kinds of information. Researchers have found that:
Gay men[73] and lesbians are more verbally fluent than heterosexuals of the same sex[74][75][76] (but two studies did not find this result).[77][78]
Gay men may receive higher scores than non-gay men on tests of object location memory (no difference was found between lesbians and non-gay women).[79][/quote]
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;32597660]Ok? you're wrong, especially with the brain. hormones are obviously at very different levels and they even emit different odors because of these differences.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation#Studies_of_brain_structure[/url]
also:[/QUOTE]
more likely
more likely
report
reported to
etc.
not particularly conclusive.
honestly, I find the implication offensive. I don't think there is any difference. Homosexuality is purely psychological. I think perhaps it is too early to accurately test these things, for a variety of reasons.
it may not ever be possible, due to the nature of homosexuality. simply because some of these people don't have these traits, they can't be called biological differences specific to homosexuals.
too early? ok explain if you have a variety of reasons. also, read more of that whole page. it's huge and has a ton of evidence and you haven't really refuted any of it.
of course sexuality is a scale and it's one thing or the other, but there are pretty distinct differences when looking at polar opposites which is what I've been talking about in the first place
[editline]2nd October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=limulus54;32597819]it may not ever be possible, due to the nature of homosexuality. simply because some of these people don't have these traits, they can't be called biological differences specific to homosexuals.[/QUOTE]
provide contrary evidence
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;32597869]too early? ok explain if you have a variety of reasons. also, read more of that whole page. it's huge and has a ton of evidence and you haven't really refuted any of it.[/QUOTE]
right. First you have to consider the people willing to participate in these tests. These are, first off, people who are out. That isn't the entire population, though nowadays it's probably more than half. Within that it's probably limited to wherever they gathered this data, this may very well be a geographical thing. It would take a very large national study to ever get any evidence that could be called conclusive, and to do that, you'd need better than "most", "on average", and "reported to" anyway.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;32597869]of course sexuality is a scale and it's one thing or the other, but there are pretty distinct differences when looking at polar opposites which is what I've been talking about in the first place[/QUOTE]
again, that's within the confines of the study, and also not absolute.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;32597869]provide contrary evidence[/QUOTE]
And you're the on who needs evidence here. In order to say that all homosexuals are biologically different from heterosexuals, you would need evidence to support that. All you've got here is meaningless averages and percentages. Since none of those are 100%, it cannot be said that all homosexuals are biologically different.
Though there is of course natural variation in all human beings, in general I consider myself biologically and physiologically the same as anyone else. Attempting to prove otherwise doesn't help anyone, even if it might temporarily strengthen your argument against those who say it is not natural.
I have nothing to say against what you've just presented because you have provided nothing that adds to what I've said. You're just rejecting it completely based on nothing.
[QUOTE=limulus54;32598252]Attempting to prove otherwise doesn't help anyone, even if it might temporarily strengthen your argument against those who say it is not natural.[/QUOTE]
that's a horrible attitude, and similar to the church's efforts (galileo specifically) to stop scientific progress because they didn't like what it presented.
Nothings wrong if you're gay, only problem I have with it is when they're super vocal about it.
Girlfriend had a gay friend she had me cart around every once and awhile and he was a nice enough guy but he had the stereotypical voice and whenever a group of joggers would run by he'd start screaming about how yummy they were and some shit.
There's a reason I started to refuse taking him anywhere :geno:
[QUOTE=Oicani Gonzales;32600263]Evidence of this?
even if it's biological + psychological it doesn't make it any worse or better. don't take it personally[/QUOTE]
well, it does. Biological makes it easier to separate gays into a different group. Almost a different species. Easier to dehumanize, even if it does emphasize the lack of choice.
[QUOTE=Sift;32600286]Nothings wrong if you're gay, only problem I have with it is when they're super vocal about it.
Girlfriend had a gay friend she had me cart around every once and awhile and he was a nice enough guy but he had the stereotypical voice and whenever a group of joggers would run by he'd start screaming about how yummy they were and some shit.
There's a reason I started to refuse taking him anywhere :geno:[/QUOTE]
Gay pride parades with leather fetisch and strap-ons probably make people hate even more.
[QUOTE=Sexy Eskimo;32600850]Gay pride parades with leather fetisch and strap-ons probably make people hate even more.[/QUOTE]
gay pride parades are kind of stupid but its a slap in the face to many people saying "This is a free country, so fuck you"
it makes haters hate more, though
arguing against anything on the stance of whether it is natural is completely pointless, as the human race has stopped relying solely on nature for support and sustenance
i wouldn't argue against chocolate milk because it doesn't come from a cow
*makes peace sign with hand, kisses it*
[QUOTE=Oicani Gonzales;32600956]lots of our psychological characteristics - most of them - are biological
it doesnt mean shit. sure, whoever wants to hate on something will hate, no matter what. ever seen the wbc? they have absolutely no basis on their claims yet they do their shit.
and there is absolutely no evidence that homosexuality is not related to biological characteristics. i'd be better if in the future you refrained from claiming stuff without being able to back it up[/QUOTE]
I would argue that I can back it up. I'm not necessarily arguing that there's evidence for it being entirely unrelated, but more that there's no evidence to support that opposite. in order to claim that homosexuality is directly linked with biological factors, I believe you have to do a bit better than some vague statements on a Wikipedia page.
I did stray a bit from that, but it's the point I was trying to make. There isn't any conclusive evidence for either side.
against nature? obviously not if there are homosexuals, then clearly it's a part of nature.
guys guys
gays are unnatural my mommy said the bible said so
[QUOTE=limulus54;32601325]I would argue that I can back it up. I'm not necessarily arguing that there's evidence for it being entirely unrelated, but more that there's no evidence to support that opposite. in order to claim that homosexuality is directly linked with biological factors, I believe you have to do a bit better than some vague statements on a Wikipedia page.
I did stray a bit from that, but it's the point I was trying to make. There isn't any conclusive evidence for either side.[/QUOTE]
that whole wikipedia article is cited and it's a lot more than what I posted. Read the whole thing, check out the citations and come back.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;32594564]what's wrong with that? also what right do you have to decide who can raise children? What's the difference?[/QUOTE]
ok relax. I never said I have a right to decide anything. I just shared what I think. And I think a kid would be raised better with a mother and a father instead of both of the same sex. They'd have a dad to talk to about male things, and a mom to talk to about female things. A girl with two dads doesn't sound so ideal to me. I'm not stating facts.
[QUOTE=Face Melter;32602071]ok relax. I never said I have a right to decide anything. I just shared what I think. And I think a kid would be raised better with a mother and a father instead of both of the same sex. They'd have a dad to talk to about male things, and a mom to talk to about female things. A girl with two dads doesn't sound so ideal to me. I'm not stating facts.[/QUOTE]
you're right, you're stating nonsense because actual studies show otherwise
[url]http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20051012/study-same-sex-parents-raise-well-adjusted-kids[/url]
and the obligatory wiki article- note more recent studies especially the ones showing that in some cases parents are actually [I]better[/I]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting[/url]
ok you win
:~)
If you aren't a total redneck, then there should be nothing wrong with "gays".
They look like us (us ~ heteros in this case), they work like us, they ARE LIKE US, but they don't reproduce (Which is a good thing actually for this planet).
But why do some people hate gays? Is it really that disgusting for them to understand them? Well normally they don't even try to understand, it is different and different is bad(This line contains sarcasm and may cause severe confusion for some people)
I honestly don't get people who have a problem with gays. So what if they are attracted to the same gender? That's just how they are and their personal lives do not affect you. You can't "catch" homosexuality, gay people aren't going around trying to recruit others into being gay, so why does it matter who they are attracted to? As long as whatever goes on is between consenting human adults then what is the harm? Why not live and let live? Other than who they are attracted to they're no different to heterosexuals.
People who say it's "unnatural", I personally don't believe it is unnatural as I don't think it's a choice to be gay (why would there be gay people in places like Uganda if it were a choice?) but even though they don't reproduce naturally (some do go on to adopt or have children in other ways) then so what? There's plenty of straight people with no intention of reproducing either (myself included) so I guess we're all "unnatural" too. They may say homosexual sex acts are unnatural but these sex acts are commonly used in heterosexual sex too, so I guess anything but standard penetrative sex is generally wrong? "nature" isn't really an excuse.
Those who feel it goes against their religion, fine, that's your opinion and your church doesn't have to condone it. Church and state should be separate though and your religion should not affect laws such as the legality of gay marriage. It also isn't an excuse to actively discriminate against gay people just because you personally don't agree with homosexuality.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;32601653]that whole wikipedia article is cited and it's a lot more than what I posted. Read the whole thing, check out the citations and come back.[/QUOTE]
I've read the damn article. The closest any of that comes to being conclusive is the study of INAH3, and in that case, all the test subject had died of aids. Most of the sections of the article mention their own insignificance. Even then, the studies which have been significant have only been enough to suggest a biological link, not come anywhere near close to proving one. There is not enough evidence here to claim that there are measurable biological differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals.
[QUOTE=limulus54;32597819]
Homosexuality is purely psychological.[/QUOTE]
Sorry but what in every hell does this even mean. What is the criteria for a condition/disorder/trait/characterstic to be classed as purely psychological?
if by this you mean that it has no "physical" manifestation (because i cannot think of how else this could mean) then really there is no such thing?
Disorders: everything from schizophrenia to depression to anorexia nervosa to insomnia to OCD have physical implications concerning the brain such as structural abnormalities and imbalance of neurotransmitters, hormones etc?
behaviour, personality: optimistic people have increased release of particular hormons, increased receptors. When you are playing video games you brain will release serotonin. You feel hungry because the hypothalamus of your brain tells you with chemicals. You might get more hungrier than others because your hypothalamus is very large or a railway spike has penetrated it causing a permanent damage. you might want to molest women more because of a tumour on your brain.
The brain is a physical organ part of biology, not some magical sacred thing that inexplicably works in some unobservable way separate from the physical realm of mortals so we will never understand how, like God or a calculator.
In short please explain and elaborate on "purely psychological", and tell how homosexuality can be purely psychological
[QUOTE=J!NX;32601355]guys guys
gays are unnatural my mommy said the bible said so[/QUOTE]
Basically like this
[img]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_SQ44FCDzSHY/TChf567nVdI/AAAAAAAAApE/dC5eG7h0W4c/s1600/FVGmA.jpg[/img]
Although the smarter homophobes are not as stupid as to use religion as a reason. I would have a blast shoving the Biblical atrocities in their faces.
[QUOTE=Leg of Doom;32605068]Sorry but what in every hell does this even mean. What is the criteria for a condition/disorder/trait/characterstic to be classed as purely psychological?
if by this you mean that it has no "physical" manifestation (because i cannot think of how else this could mean) then really there is no such thing?
Disorders: everything from schizophrenia to depression to anorexia nervosa to insomnia to OCD have physical implications concerning the brain such as structural abnormalities and imbalance of neurotransmitters, hormones etc?
behaviour, personality: optimistic people have increased release of particular hormons, increased receptors. When you are playing video games you brain will release serotonin. You feel hungry because the hypothalamus of your brain tells you with chemicals. You might get more hungrier than others because your hypothalamus is very large or a railway spike has penetrated it causing a permanent damage. you might want to molest women more because of a tumour on your brain.
The brain is a physical organ part of biology, not some magical sacred thing that inexplicably works in some unobservable way separate from the physical realm of mortals so we will never understand how, like God or a calculator.
In short please explain and elaborate on "purely psychological", and tell how homosexuality can be purely psychological[/QUOTE]
That's more a mix of philosophy, personal experience, and what really comes down to an opinion.
I believe the brain and the mind are at least partially separate. chemical changes may influence the mind but not control it absolutely.
But this really has no place here, and I should have worded that differently than as an absolute statement.
[QUOTE=xXDictatorXx;32604358]I honestly don't get people who have a problem with gays. So what if they are attracted to the same gender? That's just how they are and their personal lives do not affect you. You can't "catch" homosexuality, gay people aren't going around trying to recruit others into being gay, so why does it matter who they are attracted to? As long as whatever goes on is between consenting human adults then what is the harm? Why not live and let live? Other than who they are attracted to they're no different to heterosexuals.
People who say it's "unnatural", I personally don't believe it is unnatural as I don't think it's a choice to be gay (why would there be gay people in places like Uganda if it were a choice?) but even though they don't reproduce naturally (some do go on to adopt or have children in other ways) then so what? There's plenty of straight people with no intention of reproducing either (myself included) so I guess we're all "unnatural" too. They may say homosexual sex acts are unnatural but these sex acts are commonly used in heterosexual sex too, so I guess anything but standard penetrative sex is generally wrong? "nature" isn't really an excuse.
Those who feel it goes against their religion, fine, that's your opinion and your church doesn't have to condone it. Church and state should be separate though and your religion should not affect laws such as the legality of gay marriage. It also isn't an excuse to actively discriminate against gay people just because you personally don't agree with homosexuality.[/QUOTE]
*Thumbs up for this post*
[QUOTE=Sift;32600286]Nothings wrong if you're gay, only problem I have with it is when they're super vocal about it.
Girlfriend had a gay friend she had me cart around every once and awhile and he was a nice enough guy but he had the stereotypical voice and whenever a group of joggers would run by he'd start screaming about how yummy they were and some shit.
There's a reason I started to refuse taking him anywhere :geno:[/QUOTE]
and some straight guys will comment on how hot random girls are
there's a difference between being gay and being obnoxious, but you can easily be both
plus the non-obnoxious gay guys you probably don't notice are gay because they keep their comments about how hot dudes are to themselves, just like non-obnoxious straight guys don't go on about how hot random chicks are
i've no idea what point i'm trying to make here, but yeah
[QUOTE=Negrul1;32614276]and some straight guys will comment on how hot random girls are
there's a difference between being gay and being obnoxious, but you can easily be both
plus the non-obnoxious gay guys you probably don't notice are gay because they keep their comments about how hot dudes are to themselves, just like non-obnoxious straight guys don't go on about how hot random chicks are
i've no idea what point i'm trying to make here, but yeah[/QUOTE]
I guess that it's like I said before, it's pretty much redundant to comment on because it isn't related to their sexuality, rather their obnoxiousness
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
