[QUOTE=propan;35336478]I think that it comes from living a sheltered lifestyle, in my high school class, you could pretty much name off every kid who was gay because they weren't social, like at all.[/QUOTE]
Or maybe they weren't social because they knew they would have a hard time being accepted into society due to the stigma related to being homosexual?
[QUOTE=Lilyo;35336608]Or maybe they weren't social because they knew they would have a hard time being accepted into society due to the stigma related to being homosexual?[/QUOTE]
I've had friends that were social that hid it until they graduated. I really never would have guessed that they were gay either.
Doesn't that disprove the point you were just trying to make?...
[QUOTE=Lilyo;35336757]Doesn't that disprove the point you were just trying to make?...[/QUOTE]
I don't see how.
"I think that it comes from living a sheltered lifestyle" and then you proceeded to say that you knew people who were social and didn't live a sheltered lifestyle that were also gay...
[QUOTE=propan;35336478]I think that it comes from living a sheltered lifestyle, in my high school class, you could pretty much name off every kid who was gay because they weren't social, like at all.[/QUOTE]
uh
maybe they weren't social because they were socially ostracized for being gay?
I don't wanna step on any toes, but I have a gay friend with an abusive father.
When I was talking to him about whether or not homosexuality is a choice, he had this to say (roughly):
"I hate when people say we're born like this. It's not genetic or natural. I know I'm gay because of psychological trauma."
I brought up the obvious purposes of anatomical construction, and he agreed that people are built for heterosexuality.
He continued on to say that the origin of who he is, hasn't affected his acceptance of who he is.
He accepts himself and he's proud that he can do that, especially with how homophobic his dad is.
I kind of envy him for his bravery.
Essentially, in his case, the homosexuality is caused by trauma. And he knows it. He accepts it.
What people need to remember is that yes, homosexuality is "abnormal." People are built for a very specific kind of sexual relationship.
But people also need to remember that "abnormal" doesn't always equal "bad."
Your friend ignores undeniable evidence of born homosexuality (see the top of page five). While I'm not saying that I know for certain what the cause of homosexuality is in his specific case, the majority are certainly born into it.
Homosexuality is not abnormal, it is simply different from the majority of the population. People are different, none of us have the same DNA. 'People' are not built for a specific sexual relationship, there is no master blueprint for what humans ought to be, but rather a large population of very similar DNA.
[editline]29th March 2012[/editline]
Additional reading:
Hormone reception post puberty that demonstrates a biologic link to homosexuality
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6089349[/url]
[url]http://www.nytimes.com/1984/09/21/us/homosexual-study-cites-hormone-link.html[/url]
[url]http://www.pnas.org/content/102/20/7356.long[/url]
Response to sexual stimulus in the brain, displaying non-choice attraction factors
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17636559[/url]
[QUOTE=sdwise;35339193]
But people also need to remember that "abnormal" doesn't always equal "bad."[/QUOTE]
But calling something abnormal isn't normalising it, I'd argue that calling it this is effectively making it a bad thing. All of the developed world's medical authorities recognise that it isn't a mental illness, there is no reason to treat it this way other than to marginalise people (which sheltered white males love doing).
People in this thread take the complexity of sexuality and manipulate it into an excuse to treat people as other which is just backwards and stupid.
[QUOTE=Captain Forever;35340055]But calling something abnormal isn't normalising it, I'd argue that calling it this is effectively making it a bad thing. All of the developed world's medical authorities recognise that it isn't a mental illness, there is no reason to treat it this way other than to marginalise people (which sheltered white males love doing).
People in this thread take the complexity of sexuality and manipulate it into an excuse to treat people as other which is just backwards and stupid.[/QUOTE]
I disagree, though the pure definition of the word says another story.
[quote]Deviating from what is normal or usual, typically in a way that is undesirable.[/quote]
I'm not turning this debate over into one about a word, just saying that I agree with Sdwise; Abnormal isn't [i]always[/i] bad, just usually is found to be that way.
And as I pointed out, "normal" is a relative term. People should not be labeled abnormal for having a sexuality that deviates from the majority, under the understanding that no person's DNA can represent what is human better than another's.
[QUOTE=Gamershaze;35359405]I disagree, though the pure definition of the word says another story.
I'm not turning this debate over into one about a word, just saying that I agree with Sdwise; Abnormal isn't [i]always[/i] bad, just usually is found to be that way.[/QUOTE]
What I said had nothing to do with the semantics of the world 'abnormal'. What I said is clear, labeling something as abnormal doesn't normalise it, you're making it 'other' and creating an us and them attitude which only breeds more bigots. Would you honestly go up to a gay man and tell him he is abnormal? Because if what you're saying is true, you should be able to.
Not a choice. This is fact, and not debatable. This thread does not belong in this section.
[QUOTE=Pantz76;35367438]Not a choice. This is fact, and not debatable. This thread does not belong in this section.[/QUOTE]
It is debatable to the point of trying to correct other people's opinion which in your case you are horrible at doing.
I think its a mix really. With being born gay, growing up sexually attracted to gays, or just letting society drive your sexuality. For the gene part I'd have to say its not really a gene, but more of an instinct when they are born. People are gay for many different reasons and its different for every person. One might say because he was always like this or another might be because they grew up to it, or another might say because of past failed relationships with the opposite gender. You can categorize it, but all in all you can't change the fact that a person's actions are always a choice of what they do. Their mentality will always drive them to do something that their mental state is right or what the want and in the end the person gets to make the choice. Depending on the different categories a person might have a stronger or weaker pull to the opposite sex. More of the pull the stronger their sexuality is to the opposite sex and vice versa. A person's sexuality is either based of their mentality, instinct, or society.
[QUOTE=choco cookie;35382117]
For the gene part I'd have to say its not really a gene, but more of an instinct when they are born.
[/QUOTE]
What do you think instinct is?
[editline]1st April 2012[/editline]
I argue that 'mentality/society' factors only work together in driving a person's acceptance of themselves, and thus their outwardly projected sexuality. Like a homophobic male politician caught with a guy.
[QUOTE=choco cookie;35382117]It is debatable to the point of trying to correct other people's opinion which in your case you are horrible at doing.
I think its a mix really. With being born gay, growing up sexually attracted to gays, or just letting society drive your sexuality. For the gene part I'd have to say its not really a gene, but more of an instinct when they are born. People are gay for many different reasons and its different for every person. One might say because he was always like this or another might be because they grew up to it, or another might say because of past failed relationships with the opposite gender. You can categorize it, but all in all you can't change the fact that a person's actions are always a choice of what they do. Their mentality will always drive them to do something that their mental state is right or what the want and in the end the person gets to make the choice. Depending on the different categories a person might have a stronger or weaker pull to the opposite sex. More of the pull the stronger their sexuality is to the opposite sex and vice versa. A person's sexuality is either based of their mentality, instinct, or society.[/QUOTE]
This is kind of what I was trying to get at.
I think people can be gay for all kinds of reasons. I don't think it's a gene, but I do think it [i]may[/i] be instinctual (from birth), simply learned, or caused by trauma (like in my friend's case).
I think it's fairly unique from person to person.
Like I just asked, what do you think instinct is? Genes.
It seems unlikely that a low portion of the population can be homosexual with only a single gene determining sexuality, especially when you consider bisexuality. It looks to me like sexuality is determined by a combination of genes.
There is evidence to support [url=http://facepunch.com/threads/1170160?p=35339617&viewfull=1#post35339617]biologic causes[/url], it is ignorant to ignore it.
I'm open to other causes, but no proper evidence has been shown.
Why the hell are we still arguing this? None of my peers in my field (biology) have found evidence to suggest that homosexuality is choice. However, there is ample amounts of evidence (which I and others have posted several times already) to suggest that it is purely biological.
[QUOTE=fluke42;35412650]Why the hell are we still arguing this? None of my peers in my field (biology) have found evidence to suggest that homosexuality is choice. However, there is ample amounts of evidence (which I and others have posted several times already) to suggest that it is purely biological.[/QUOTE]Bashing one's head against a brick wall is a proud Facepunch tradition going back to our founding.
I keep on saying this, but i'm absolutely convinced the Groundhog Effect exists within forum debates.
I don't think it's a choice. Back in August, I got curious in some futanari things. I was very guilty about it and kept telling myself I don't like gay shit and stuff like that. I really couldn't stop it, I liked it a lot even though I kept telling myself I hated it. I ended up becoming bisexual. There is no way its choice*
Genetic or choice?
Both.
[QUOTE=zerothefallen;35413028]I don't think it's a choice. Back in August, I got curious in some futanari things. I was very guilty about it and [B]kept telling myself I don't like gay shit and stuff like that. I really couldn't stop it, I liked it a lot even though I kept telling myself I hated it.[/B] I ended up becoming bisexual. There is no way its genetic[/QUOTE]
So even though you wanted to not like it, you like it. Yeah, I'm gonna say that means it's not a choice.
[QUOTE=Stalk;35413478]Genetic or choice?
Both.[/QUOTE]
I don't really see how you can argue it's a choice. At no point did I say to myself "Hm, I know. My life's too easy, let's shake things up a bit by liking dick instead!". You don't consciously decide what you're attracted to. God knows if you could, there'd be none of those niche fetish websites out there, let alone gay people.
I'll restate my belief, just to get things going.
I believe there are two ways a person can be gay. Firstly, I'd like to state two things just to clear things up.
1. When I say biological factors, I mean something you're born with, such as genes.
2. When I say environmental factors, I mean something you learn over time, or adopt, if you will. These are NOT just parents. Parents are just a bigger factor because you're around them quite a bit. I know "environmental factors" mean something else, I just can't find the right word(s) to describe what I refer to as "environmental factors".
Now I'll state the three ways a person can be gay.
1. Nature (biological factors): There have been numerous studies giving evidence (not exact proof, but it's better than nothing) that homosexuals have something different with them biologically. I won't post sources as I have seen several people posting sources regarding biological factors. If you really want some sources for my argument, look around the thread for other posts.
2. Nurture (environmental factors): I believe that kids at a young age can "learn" to be homosexual. Now this doesn't mean that someone is teaching this kid to be gay, it's obviously unintentional. Another thing to keep in mind is that parents aren't the only environmental factor. There are other environmental factors such as friends, television, etc. Some of them may not make that big of a difference as others. Parents are just a big one due to the fact they raise you and you're probably around them a lot. Let me give you an example of how this might work.
- Let's say your parents are gay and they adopt you at a very young age (maybe 0-4 years of age for example) and you don't watch a lot of television, you don't have a lot of friends,
etc. and you've been around your parents for the good majority of your life, theoretically, you should be gay. Why? Because you've seen love in a homosexual way for almost all of your life. Had you have had straight parents, this would never have happened. Now lets say you were adopted at the same age and had gay parents. This time, let's change the circumstances. You have seen television, you have a lot of friends, and you are not around your parents very much (maybe a daycare?). Now theoretically, you should be straight. Why? Because you have not seen very much homosexual love and have in fact seen more straight love. These are just examples, it all depends on the circumstances.
[QUOTE=deaded38;35425997]I'll restate my belief, just to get things going.
I believe there are two ways a person can be gay. Firstly, I'd like to state two things just to clear things up.
1. When I say biological factors, I mean something you're born with, such as genes.
2. When I say environmental factors, I mean something you learn over time, or adopt, if you will. These are NOT just parents. Parents are just a bigger factor because you're around them quite a bit. I know "environmental factors" mean something else, I just can't find the right word(s) to describe what I refer to as "environmental factors".
Now I'll state the three ways a person can be gay.
1. Nature (biological factors): There have been numerous studies giving evidence (not exact proof, but it's better than nothing) that homosexuals have something different with them biologically. I won't post sources as I have seen several people posting sources regarding biological factors. If you really want some sources for my argument, look around the thread for other posts.
2. Nurture (environmental factors): I believe that kids at a young age can "learn" to be homosexual. Now this doesn't mean that someone is teaching this kid to be gay, it's obviously unintentional. Another thing to keep in mind is that parents aren't the only environmental factor. There are other environmental factors such as friends, television, etc. Some of them may not make that big of a difference as others. Parents are just a big one due to the fact they raise you and you're probably around them a lot. Let me give you an example of how this might work.
- Let's say your parents are gay and they adopt you at a very young age (maybe 0-4 years of age for example) and you don't watch a lot of television, you don't have a lot of friends,
etc. and you've been around your parents for the good majority of your life, theoretically, you should be gay. Why? Because you've seen love in a homosexual way for almost all of your life. Had you have had straight parents, this would never have happened. Now lets say you were adopted at the same age and had gay parents. This time, let's change the circumstances. You have seen television, you have a lot of friends, and you are not around your parents very much (maybe a daycare?). Now theoretically, you should be straight. Why? Because you have not seen very much homosexual love and have in fact seen more straight love. These are just examples, it all depends on the circumstances.[/QUOTE]
The issue with your Nurture argument is that most children raised by homosexuals end up being heterosexual. If your argument was valid, all children raised by homosexuals would end up being homosexual.
[QUOTE=fluke42;35426107]The issue with your Nurture argument is that most children raised by homosexuals end up being heterosexual. If your argument was valid, all children raised by homosexuals would end up being homosexual.[/QUOTE]
No, my argument is fine. Obviously most children raised by gay parents will be heterosexual due to the fact we live in a heterosexual society. I'm just saying there are exceptions.
Choice, its been proven not to be a "gene".
I don't believe anyone can MAKE themselves attracted to another human being unless it was instinctual
You can't make yourself attracted to an unattractive person physically... maybe mentally
[QUOTE=Ruzza;35426772]Choice, its been proven not to be a "gene".[/QUOTE]Would be lovely if you linked us to this proof.
I still think it's psychology. I've started noticing patterns in how peoples' parents' behaviors, and the people themselves. I believe the whole personality of someone usually boils down to how they were treated in their childhood.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
