Homosexuality

Since certain twins (one part of the pair) can be acertained to be homosexuals even from early years, it seems to be quite a difficult matter.

At that age children do not have any incentive to make a choice (as if you can chose who you are attracted to :dizzy2: ), yet there is little you can say about it. Upbringing doesn't seem to affect that since twins are treated equally to a great extent. Hormones in the womb should be equal as well, but we can't know for sure though. Genes are the same.

So we end up with a situation where we simply can't say that it is one thing or the other.

Some can get homosexual due to genes probably, because some animals are gay. But not too many, especially not for species where they get few children. It can only appear through new mutations, or in the case of humans, when homosexuals are by culture forced to live as heterosexuals, get children, and therefore reproduce despite being gay.

Some more probably get homosexual because of hormone and toxine pollution. For example, male fish living downstreams of sewers have turned into strange monsters somewhere between man and woman and something else that doesn't belong to this world because of pollution from contraceptive pills. Plasters with hormones, given to 40-60 years old women in a certain period also contribute as much as around 10 contraceptive pills to this effect - which makes it strange that EU and US government haven't forbidden them, especially when other methods of taking in the same substance are more medically useful as the dosage received through plasters are difficult to regulate properly. This has made me wonder if most EU and USA politicians perhaps might be gay, since they seem so eager to make others become gay too.

Some probably get gay because it's fashionable, much like in 19th century England, ancient Greece, etc.

Some probably get gay because they're kept from women for a very long time and only see men, and when they're in the critical age for development of "the urge" - because the urge is only halfway ready programmed in the genes - they get it wrong because of that. This applies to spartans, and it has been studied in plenty of other situations, like prisons etc.

But one would think the babe thread would cure all cases caused by the last two...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kraxis

Since certain twins (one part of the pair) can be acertained to be homosexuals even from early years, it seems to be quite a difficult matter.

At that age children do not have any incentive to make a choice (as if you can chose who you are attracted to :dizzy2: ), yet there is little you can say about it. Upbringing doesn't seem to affect that since twins are treated equally to a great extent. Hormones in the womb should be equal as well, but we can't know for sure though. Genes are the same.

So we end up with a situation where we simply can't say that it is one thing or the other.

---

How early years? Can you really tell something about someone's seuxality when they're below an age where they can make choices? If so, it's really scary because then someone might take advantage of that and persuade a young boy to become homosexual to abuse him. Bleh... :furious3:

It was a show made specifically on this issue and there were boys down tothe age of 7 I think.
They didn't much mind for the classical boy toys. Some more than others. The most extreme of the boys I would say would be transsexuals, meaning females caught in male bodies. But others were just very different.

The another part was about grown up twins of different sexual preference and they mentioned that often the straight twin knew his brother was gay long before he did himself.

I don't think you con convince a boy to be homosexual, you can abuse of course, but most studies I have heard of indicate that such boys stay within the normal spread of sexual preferences.

If one means practicing homosexuality, it seems to be choice which determines whether one practices or not. If one means who one is attracted to, I would say a myriad of factors that would probably not be characterized by choice. That said, at the risk of overreacting, I think there is often a disturbing obsession with finding and labeling gay people, and thinking about it all the time. Some people, I think, spend more time worrying about who is gay, and what's gay, than homosexuals looking for a gay partner do. Frankly, those people that seem to spend all of their time thinking about 'gay' people are a bit weird. To practice homosexuality is a personal choice, and it is clearly a choice they should be free to make. Personally, I very much liked how homosexuals were quite free to be homosexuals in Britain, relatively free of prejudice. I met a few gay politicians and partners. They could be openly gay, and nobody cared; the way it should be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

So can you tell us when, exactly, you chose to be attracted to women? Can you recall the day when you weighed the decision, saying to yourself, "Hot leathermen or cheerleaders? Which shall it be?"

---

yes actually. July 14 1999 It was a tuesday IIRC. Now dont get me wrong the leatherman made a good arguement and even busted out the village people. I nesarly choose them to. Then that cheerleader did that thing with her tounge and showed what she could do with her legs. When the guy tried that he tore his hamstring and bit his tounge open

It's a mixture between the second and third choice in my opinion...

As for Anthony...you dirty...:no:
:inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

yes actually. July 14 1999 It was a tuesday IIRC. Now dont get me wrong the leatherman made a good arguement and even busted out the village people. I nesarly choose them to. Then that cheerleader did that thing with her tounge and showed what she could do with her legs. When the guy tried that he tore his hamstring and bit his tounge open

---

Im pretty sure that last part makes you gay SFTS.:sweatdrop:

As too gay people they dont really bother me. I have no problem with them as long as they dont come on too me then thats too far.:no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Csar

Im pretty sure that last part makes you gay SFTS.:sweatdrop:

As too gay people they dont really bother me. I have no problem with them as long as they dont come on too me then thats too far.:no:

---

Seconded.

Most people who are/closely related to a homosexual say that it's fairly obvious from birth. They say that they always knew.

I don't think it's a matter of choice, but the upbringing could have an effect...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

yes actually. July 14 1999 It was a tuesday IIRC. Now dont get me wrong the leatherman made a good arguement and even busted out the village people. I nesarly choose them to. Then that cheerleader did that thing with her tounge and showed what she could do with her legs. When the guy tried that he tore his hamstring and bit his tounge open

---

I consider myself well-answered. SFTS decided to be straight on Tuesday, July 14th, 1999. Enough said.

Wait a minute! July 14th, 1999 was a Wednesday! Liar! Liar! Pants on fire!

I thought that it had been established previously that it is not genetic...

I say there's summat in the water... hormones collected in those places where the water has been through others (don't they say the water in the south east has been through at least a few people?) collects hormones from women on the Contraceptive Pill, HRT, etc and is thence drunk by the unsuspecting person (pregnant or otherwise) and alters the foetus/child until adolescence. Also, farmers give hormones to chickens and other such livestock to make them bigger and the meat of the animals is eaten so additionalal hormones there. And I realise that I chose psychology, but I was really heading towards "upbringing" as in food and water used when the child was growing up... but also the time in the womb is significant... perhaps also when the gentleman's soldiers are being made and the womans ovaries are being filled, but I digress... there's definitely summat in the water...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duke Malcolm

I thought that it had been established previously that it is not genetic...

---

nope - it hasn't "been established"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix

How early years? Can you really tell something about someone's seuxality when they're below an age where they can make choices? If so, it's really scary because then someone might take advantage of that and persuade a young boy to become homosexual to abuse him. Bleh... :furious3:

---

A large Australian study has once shown that it's possible to predict later sexual orientation in the majority of cases at the age of 2.

What precisely causes homosexuality is not clear yet. That's no surprise since that is so for all personality traits. There's no doubt however that it has a multifactioral cause.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duke Malcolm

I thought that it had been established previously that it is not genetic...

---

Well, the fact that the chance is unequally distributed over families suggests that it is partly genetic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A.Saturnus

A large Australian study has once shown that it's possible to predict later sexual orientation in the majority of cases at the age of 2.

---

How was that study done exactly? If you predicted heterosexual everytime you'd be correct in the majority of cases. Were their predictions of homosexuality correct the majority of the time?

Scientifically or philosophically?

For the second one I’ll give you all a hint…
Kangaroo’s!

Do with it as you pleas.

This is an interesting question. Part of the problem here is that to qualify as homosexual to the rest of us, a person really only has to pronounce oneself as one. So I would say that this means there are at least some "homosexuals" whose difference in sexual preference has nothing to do directly with genetics. Furthermore, I think we'd all agree that "psychology" plays a part in sexual attraction. Take pedophilia for instance: I would bet all that it is NOT POSSIBLE for an attraction to the form of children to be a direct result of genetic encoding... such a thing could only be the result of psychological perversion. I would not contend, however, that the attraction that a pedophile feels is "not real".

So my answer is: there are probably some homosexuals whose difference in sexual preference is at least partly the result of psychological perversion and there are probably some homosexuals whose sexual deviation has nothing to do directly with genetics. The rest of the matter in question I am uncertain of, and don't have enough background in genetics to attempt any sort of guess or analyzation.

As a follow up I would say that a homosexual's sexual deviation, in action, no matter the "cause", has an inordinately large psychological component to it, due to all the errant penetration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

How was that study done exactly? If you predicted heterosexual everytime you'd be correct in the majority of cases. Were their predictions of homosexuality correct the majority of the time?

---

I was a bit unclear. The study was not qualitative but quantitative. Children were measured on a scale how much gender prototypicality they showed. The same people were asked as adults to range themselves on a scale how heterosexual/homosexual they found themselves. There was a significant correlation between the two measures.

A combination of Factors:

Choice? A little... possibly.

Gentics? Maybe.

Physchology? Most likely. University of Chicago did a study where they examined a certain part of the brain responsible for, I believe it was, sexual emotions. They found that the part of the brain in straight men was about 3 or 4 times as active as the part of the brain in straight women. The part of the brain in gay men was equal to the part of the brain in straight women. I'd give you a link, but I really dont remember what it was (A friend who is majoring in neurology (sp) gave it to me a while back). Just food for thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Csar

I have no problem with them as long as they dont come on to me

---

Why? I try to hit on girls without asking them if they're heterosexual first.

Your arse is fair game, mate. :balloon2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Why? I try to hit on girls without asking them if they're heterosexual first.

Your arse is fair game, mate. :balloon2:

---

Is that my new quote? :laugh4:

That is funny.

apparently dressing up in german uniforms and/or displaying swaztikas and/or iron crosses tends to cause homosexuality in the people who fetishize certain ultraconservative ww2 political parties:

The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party, (ISBN 0964760932),

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Your arse is fair game, mate. :balloon2:

---

Awesome line... :laugh4: :laugh4:

When I was a Teenager I considered homosexuality as a form of (delicately) construction error. :shame:
Like a “flaw” in the mind of the person.

Later on I was beginning to suppose (due to the overpopulation) it’s a natural subconscious way from the human kind to keep the population level low(er).
Like kangaroos it’s been known that they can determine the population count.
Maybe other specie’s too in one way or the other have this capacity?

Then a friend pointed out there is a form off proof of from homosexuality since the Stone Age.
(Don’t ask I don’t know)
He said that they didn’t went to the hunt along with the other males.
But stayed with the women, taking care of the more household aspects of that time.
Sounds ludicrous I know.
But the again,… you know, maybe?:inquisitive:

So now I believe that’s it a combination of both.
Plus maybe a little bit of to much time on our hands and a large amount of time to play and think.

For the record: Don’t think I disapprove this phenomenon.~:)
Nature decided this to exist, so who are we to judge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mithrandir

A close relative watched a man jump in front of a train when she was 6.

She's a heterosexual. ~:rolleyes:.

---

That wasn't her dad. And who initially wrote a note explaining why he killed his daughter too, before she hid and he couldn't find her.

A stranger and your father are very different things in the psyche of a child. I think it is fair to say that this contributed to her having a warped perception of men. Not that it happens in everyone who expereiences this type of trauma, I am just pointing to this one instances where conjecture seems reasonable.

'Other'. It can't be said that if it is just genetic, psychological or a combination of both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Upxl

Then a friend pointed out there is a form off proof of from homosexuality since the Stone Age.
(Don’t ask I don’t know)
He said that they didn’t went to the hunt along with the other males.
But stayed with the women, taking care of the more household aspects of that time.
Sounds ludicrous I know.
But the again,… you know, maybe?:inquisitive:

---

You'll find that we have very little evidence of behaviour patterns from even Neolithic times. Your hypothesis is rooted in the belief that homosexuals are by nature 'feminised' and indeed, that females in prehistoric societies behaved only as 'homemakers' as we moderns understand.

There is evidence from later periods of history and other cultures that shows both of these stereotypes are deeply flawed.

I don't think the Spartan warrior was noted for staying at home in a pinny looking after the kids, was he? :stupido2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Upxl

Later on I was beginning to suppose (due to the overpopulation) it’s a natural subconscious way from the human kind to keep the population level low(er).
Like kangaroos it’s been known that they can determine the population count.
Maybe other specie’s too in one way or the other have this capacity?

---

A specie's highest goal here on Earth, is to spread itself. Prosper such that it reaches beyond all horizons.

If it gets too many of them, illnesses will break out, and/our they will starve, many will die. But those who now are left, will have excellent conditions for living.

Homosexuality either occur because of random genetical mutations, or because of a special sort of enviroment that they grow up in. I go for the first.

So my point is that homosexuality doesn`t reallly benefit a specie, the more of a specie, the better. Especially for specie like homo sapiens, who get few children. Otherwise, there should have been an increase in percentage of the amount of homosexuals thru time, but I haven`t seen anything pointing out that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Viking

A specie's highest goal here on Earth, is to spread itself. Prosper such that it reaches beyond all horizons.

If it gets too many of them, illnesses will break out, and/our they will starve, many will die. But those who now are left, will have excellent conditions for living.

Homosexuality either occur because of random genetical mutations, or because of a special sort of enviroment that they grow up in. I go for the first.

So my point is that homosexuality doesn`t reallly benefit a specie, the more of a specie, the better. Especially for specie like homo sapiens, who get few children. Otherwise, there should have been an increase in percentage of the amount of homosexuals thru time, but I haven`t seen anything pointing out that.

---

True... but if it was genetics we would also see a decline of homosexuals in the modern world (since they don't breed). We do not.
In fact there should by all standards be far more homosexuals just prior to the sexual liberation period (you can call it differently but you know what I mean). Nothing seems to indicate as much.

Neither does it explain how identical twins can have different sexuality...