aunt pam Posted August 21, 2003 Share Posted August 21, 2003 you have opened another can of worms...i do not know what makes people 'gay' either, but it seems there must be something there in the rejection field...maybe they are rejected so much by those of the opposite sex that they feel they need to resort to the same sex...or maybe it is just the 'shock factor'....or maybe they just cannot accept life the way God intended them to be so they therefore resort to the exact opposite...either way, it seems they all 'blame' being born that way...it seems to be more of an 'incorrectable' stance in life to be born that way...people tend to accept things better when another is born that way...it tends to prove that they cannot help the way they are...my question is, 'would they want to be straight if they could help it?' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glider Posted August 21, 2003 Share Posted August 21, 2003 sepultallica said in post #1 : i don't believe that homosexuality is hereditary(?). i believe that homosexuality is a result of some sort of traumatic event in a person's life (mental or physical) that triggers the change in sexual preference. granted, i haven't had any research time on the subject so i'm just throwing this out there but i just can't believe that it is something that is passed down through generations. obviously, homosexuality can be triggered by traumatic events in a persons life but is it just that? can anything erlse trigger it? i don't believe that it's a natural thing. i think that by default (?) everyone is straight. it's the normal thing. what can change a person's sexuality? Homosexuality isn't hereditary (think about the logic there). There is a genetic component to homosexuality though (but this does not mean hereditary). There is also (apparently) a teratogenic effect which occurs during gestation. This has to do with the balance between several hormones; testosterone for one. The 'default phenotype setting' for all embryos is female (regardless of XX or XY genotype). The influence of testosterone is required to 'masculinise' an embryo, including certain areas of the brain (thalamic or hypothalamic I think) associated with sex. Homosexuality has been associated with an imbalance in sex hormones at particular stages of development. The areas of the brain associated with sex typing are more developed in females and less so in males. These areas are to do with sex typing. Post mortem studies have shown these areas to be developed in homosexual males, and under developed in some homosexual females. This would suggest a strong physiological influence in homosexuality. As was mentioned, young children are unaware of sexual differentiations, but this is a developmental factor. Different hormones kick in at different stages (i.e. puberty). The hormaones that kick in depend to a degree on the sexualisation of the brain. aunt pam said in post #26 :i do not know what makes people 'gay' either, but it seems there must be something there in the rejection field...maybe they are rejected so much by those of the opposite sex that they feel they need to resort to the same sex... Think about this. If you were rejected by the opposite sex, would you turn to same-sex relationships? I doubt it. or maybe it is just the 'shock factor'....or maybe they just cannot accept life the way God intended them to be so they therefore resort to the exact opposite...er...what? either way, it seems they all 'blame' being born that way...it seems to be more of an 'incorrectable' stance in life to be born that way...people tend to accept things better when another is born that way...it tends to prove that they cannot help the way they are...my question is, 'would they want to be straight if they could help it?' No gay I ever met ever 'blamed' their sexuality on anything at all. They don't feel the need to defend it, even though so many around them persistently feel the need to attack it. Would they want to be straight if they could help it? This is exactly like asking you 'would you want to be gay if you could help it?'. I have never met a gay who wasn't (at least on the face of it) happy with the way they are. It's those around them who are unhappy with it. Whose problem do you think that is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sepultallica Posted August 21, 2003 Author Share Posted August 21, 2003 Glider said in post #27 : Think about this. If you were rejected by the opposite sex, would you turn to same-sex relationships? I doubt it. er...what? No gay I ever met ever 'blamed' their sexuality on anything at all. They don't feel the need to defend it, even though so many around them persistently feel the need to attack it. Would they want to be straight if they could help it? This is exactly like asking you 'would you want to be gay if you could help it?'. I have never met a gay who wasn't (at least on the face of it) happy with the way they are. It's those around them who are unhappy with it. Whose problem do you think that is? yeah, it doesn't sound right that they would feel guilty about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMI Posted August 21, 2003 Share Posted August 21, 2003 atinymonkey said in post #17 : It's not the temperature that is the sole cause; mice live in environments around the world well enough. It's the population that triggers the response; it's interesting but a bit of an unknown. The more crowded the area the greater the percentage of the mice picked Mickey on Mickey rather than Minnie. It seems to be crudely linked to species preservation, in mice the population can rapidly expand to outstrip available resources so the homosexual tendency’s crop up to act as a counter of some kind. It's doesn’t really work though, as the population continues to expand. The theory is that humans are the same, hence the increase in homosexual tendency’s with humans and the urbanisation of our lifestyles. But it doesn’t hold water, really. The term homosexual is actually a tern coined by the Samurai in Feudal Japan, and the Romans were also keen advocates of the alternative lifestyle. Not to mention the Greek philosophers The whole thing about trama leading to the Gay lifestyle is a bit of an oddball. Very few people haven't had a tramatic event in there lives. Wow, I've actually pondered the thought that homosexuality might be a form of natural population control. Glider is right (as usual). All indications are that hormonal levels during gestation effect, among other things, the development of the vomeronasal organ. This leads me to believe, which I had not before this thread, that someone can indeed be born gay. That said, that would make it a congenital defect. It also doesn't mean that there aren't people out there who are gay because of trauma. I knew a guy who was gay because his mother abused him terribly, both sexually and phyically, to the point where he was terrified of women. Still needing all the things that "love" gives us, he turned to men. Of course, I don't know that he wouldn't have turned out gay had the abuse not happened so I guess it is just theory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MoMan Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 Everyone knows that it's in the genes. ( homosexuality, that is.) Look, I'm 6'2'' tall; can I help it if I'm a basketball player? I had no choice--I was born that way! Crude analogy no doubt, not meant to be rude. Just pointing out that genetics alone cannot fully explain homosexuality. To kill, rob, steal, destroy...it's in our nature as humans, but most do do not act on those impulses when they arise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aunt pam Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 if it were not true that homosexuals 'blamed' being gay on something, then why are we discussing this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skye Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 Your getting blame mixed up with explain. The gays I've known that have tried hardest to explain it are ones whose families have had a problem with it. The others are just enjoying themselves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glider Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 Well said sir! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dudde Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 good explanaition skye;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMI Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 MoMan said in post #30 :Everyone knows that it's in the genes. ( homosexuality, that is.) Look, I'm 6'2'' tall; can I help it if I'm a basketball player? I had no choice--I was born that way! Crude analogy no doubt, not meant to be rude. Just pointing out that genetics alone cannot fully explain homosexuality. To kill, rob, steal, destroy...it's in our nature as humans, but most do do not act on those impulses when they arise. We are not talking genetics at all! We are talking about a congenital defect caused by a deviance of normal hormonal levels in the mother during gestation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MoMan Posted August 23, 2003 Share Posted August 23, 2003 IMI said in post #35 : We are not talking genetics at all! We are talking about a congenital defect caused by a deviance of normal hormonal levels in the mother during gestation. During gestation, as well as during all phases of human life, hormone production, tissue delivery and response, and ultimate degradation are all under precise genetic control. Any supposed congenital deviation from normal is no less under the control of genes than is the normal production of these hormones. It gets even better --- ‘normal’ production quantity does not always correlate with ‘normal’ target expression. Conversely, production abnormalities do not always yield abnormal expression. Ultimately, human behavior and interrelationships are far too complex to be entirely explained on purely biochemical terms. Biochemistry, genetics, etc. may factor in but it’s definitely not the ‘whole enchilada.’ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aunt pam Posted August 23, 2003 Share Posted August 23, 2003 blame, explain, defend, whatever the term may be...i still feel that homosexuals are homosexuals pretty much by choice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted August 24, 2003 Share Posted August 24, 2003 aunt pam said in post #37 :blame, explain, defend, whatever the term may be...i still feel that homosexuals are homosexuals pretty much by choice... You aren't too big to go over my knee missy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skye Posted August 24, 2003 Share Posted August 24, 2003 People have a choice to act on a desire but not whether or not they feel the desire. This thread has discussed what leads to the desire developing, rather than what influences making the decision to act upon it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glider Posted August 24, 2003 Share Posted August 24, 2003 aunt pam said in post #37 :blame, explain, defend, whatever the term may be...i still feel that homosexuals are homosexuals pretty much by choice... If this were true, then it would be equally true to say that you are heterosexual by choice. As you are (presumably) heterosexual, you no doubt find members of the opposite sex sexually attractive, but find the idea of same-sex relations repellant. That doesn't sound like a choice. Why should it be any different for people who find members of the same sex sexually attractive, and the idea of opposite-sex relations repellant? As both males and females find it extremely difficult, if not impossible to perform sexually with a partner to whom they are not sexually attracted (or perceive as sexually repellant), the only choice anyone has is between engaging in sexual relations with people they find sexually attractive, or celibacy. So, is it true to say you are heterosexual by choice? Do you find members of the same sex attractive, but deliberately choose to have sex only with members of the opposite sex? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sepultallica Posted August 25, 2003 Author Share Posted August 25, 2003 aunt pam said in post #37 :blame, explain, defend, whatever the term may be...i still feel that homosexuals are homosexuals pretty much by choice... i think that i would have to agree. but then again, could someone resort to homosexuality by force? could someone be traumatized by an event and turn to homosexuality as a sort of defense mechanism? Glider said in post #40 : If this were true, then it would be equally true to say that you are heterosexual by choice. As you are (presumably) heterosexual, you no doubt find members of the opposite sex sexually attractive, but find the idea of same-sex relations repellant. That doesn't sound like a choice. Why should it be any different for people who find members of the same sex sexually attractive, and the idea of opposite-sex relations repellant? As both males and females find it extremely difficult, if not impossible to perform sexually with a partner to whom they are not sexually attracted (or perceive as sexually repellant), the only choice anyone has is between engaging in sexual relations with people they find sexually attractive, or celibacy. So, is it true to say you are heterosexual by choice? Do you find members of the same sex attractive, but deliberately choose to have sex only with members of the opposite sex? i don't know too much of the human mind or biology but it's strange to me to think that celibacy and homosexuality are as natural as heterosexuality(?). without digging too deep, i would just assume that being straight is what we are born into and that a change by choice would have to stem from that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted August 25, 2003 Share Posted August 25, 2003 Celibacy is a choice. The drive to spread your genetic seed is present regardless of whether you are hetero~ or homosexual, even if in some cases it will never be expressed through the act of reproduction with multiple partners. If you consider homosexuality to be unnatural, but can't find any single thing to "blame" for the millions of gay people throughout history, perhaps it might be prudent to reconsider your definition of the word 'natural'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sepultallica Posted August 25, 2003 Author Share Posted August 25, 2003 i'll be the first to admit that i am in no way qualified to comment on the matter. my opinions are obviously clouded with steroetypes. when i said unnatural, i guess what i meant was not normal. it's just that from where i see, homosexuality is a choice and hetero.;"* is what i'd call our blueprint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMI Posted August 25, 2003 Share Posted August 25, 2003 So here it is...homosexuality is not "natural" when speaking of procreation. Men are supposed to be with women. It's as simple as putting the round peg in the round hole. There is no star-shaped peg That people are homosexual is also natural in that it is a congenital defect vice a "choice". It is okay of anyone disagrees with this...they are still wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sepultallica Posted August 25, 2003 Author Share Posted August 25, 2003 wow, now those are some bold statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 So as long as we are discussing "procreation" it's unnatural? Sorry to burst your bubble but procreation actually isn't the be-all and end-all of adaptive drives. So unless you can come up with an external, enforced and ubiquitous stimulus or constraint that can account for all instances of homosexuality in all species known to display such traits, then you are either going to accept that it is natural, or as I already suggested reconsider your definition of the word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dudde Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 some bold and completely "not smart" and challenging statements at that sepultallica. IMI, as I recall, you are not gay. right? so then, how do you know exactly what makes people homosexual? have you ever spoken with someone like that and actually asked them? I doubt it, judging by the biased and stupid way you're talking about this. Well I have, and the person I was speaking with couldn't exactly tell me why he found himself attracted to men, and not women, but he was, and I asked that SAME STUPID QUESTION if there was something that happened to him earlier in life to change him he said "no, I've been this way pretty much all my life, before I even had a chance to like girls" I think those were his exact words, it's been a while since I've talked to him, but this would tell us that he did not make any conscious choice of liking guys or girls, it just came "naturally" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMI Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Context. I can say that homosexuality is unnatural, with regards to procreation, while saying it is a natural behavior for someone who is pre-disposed based on congenital defect. You are correct, procreation is not the be-all end-all of adaptive drives. Survival of species is. Procreation is a major facet of that though. So literal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMI Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Dudde said in post #47 :some bold and completely "not smart" and challenging statements at that sepultallica. IMI, as I recall, you are not gay. right? so then, how do you know exactly what makes people homosexual? have you ever spoken with someone like that and actually asked them? I doubt it, judging by the biased and stupid way you're talking about this. Well I have, and the person I was speaking with couldn't exactly tell me why he found himself attracted to men, and not women, but he was, and I asked that SAME STUPID QUESTION if there was something that happened to him earlier in life to change him he said "no, I've been this way pretty much all my life, before I even had a chance to like girls" I think those were his exact words, it's been a while since I've talked to him, but this would tell us that he did not make any conscious choice of liking guys or girls, it just came "naturally" Dudde, read the entire thread before you comment to save yourself from looking like the stupid one indeed! Though I stated that I have known a homosexual who I believe was so due to trauma, I go on to state evidence that homosexuality is more so caused by a congenital abnormality that effects the development of the vomeronasal organ. This means that it is not a choice. If you look back at the my post, the one which you felt you needed to respond to, and take off your "idiot" glasses, you will see that I say, "...vice a "choice"" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dudde Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 tee hee hee point taken and apology offered IMI that just goes to show, never don't sleep and write an essay while looking at scienceforums;) survival of species used to be the be-all end-all, I believe that has shifted slightly today into which most people say survival of the "self" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts