Phi for All

There's some hormonal chemistry going on as well, and don't discount environmental effects. In most things, but especially science, there is rarely only one thing influencing another. It's usually an array of things. Are you attracted sexually to men, but don't like that it makes you a homosexual? Sexual attraction doesn't mean you have to like ALL people of a certain gender.

He refers to "my homosexuality" and claims it makes him ugly, and wants to know if science can make him heterosexual. That's what I based my observations on. There may be some translation problems. The Swiss are taught multiple languages, but I don't find Mr Christian's posts very informative. There was a problem with his beard growing during puberty, but I'm left to guess what that problem was. I can understand the non-interest in team sports being problematic in many societies for a small boy, but the voice sounding like a girl is pretty common. I was the only baritone in my class when I was 13, and most of the guys sounded like girls, especially over the phone. OTOH, when it comes to singing lead, very few bands have a baritone. Tenor voices dominate popular male music, so once again we have a perception problem rather than a physical one. I'm hoping we can reinforce his decision to continue therapy, but have no interest in replacing it.

This is an aspect of the environmental issues that accompany the hormonal and biological issues of our sexual orientation. Well-meaning people your were raised around see your pain and want to help, but traditionally have a limited view on relationships. Modern reasoning isn't so black and white, and most aspects can be analyzed as part of a spectrum of behavior. We're ALL normal when you use the right perspective.

This was my thinking as well, and there might be family members or friends who think they're helping by further enabling the isolation.

Help me understand, please. You're attracted to men, but you hate that you're attracted to men, is that right?

Push back doesn't equal hate, and neither do countersuits. Being firm with children seems to be an effective formula.

We're you raised to think same sex relationships are wrong? They aren't, there's lots of scientific evidence, and plenty of examples in nature. Sexual attraction is a broad spectrum. As long as the people you're attracted to are consenting adults, there's nothing ugly about it.

! Moderator Note We don't discuss numerology here. It's been consistently refuted and there is nothing productive or scientific about it. Please go somewhere else to discuss these types of topics (astrology, numerology, creationism, phrenology, etc.).

First, it shouldn't be an insult. Second, I'm not sure what "look gay" means in this context, since we only have your pictures to judge by. And third, we still don't know what gender you identify with, but should we assume you're attracted to women, since you object to being considered gay? The situations you describe in your OP aren't clear. You said you had problems in puberty with your beard, but you also said you looked like a girl. I'm still unsure what parts of your sexuality are bothering you. Unless I missed something, it seems like you're angry that people think you look gay because you're not, but I don't know why that's such a problem. Does it keep you from meeting eligible women? Have you talked to a professional about this? "Pretty sure" doesn't seem to be adequate for something this important. We're very happy to discuss this problem with you, but this is beyond our scope. NOBODY here is qualified to talk you down from suicidal thoughts over the internet. If you mention this again, we're going to have to close the thread and recommend you see a medical professional IMMEDIATELY! In any case, I highly recommend you seek professional help for this problem.

Maybe it's just the timing, but I don't remember being this disgusted by a religious assertion before. It shows a myopic and desperate need for privilege that ignores reality. This is the stance that can justify wiping out species wholesale, because they were only put there "for us to enjoy". It's also intellectually dishonest to misuse scientific claims to bolster your shaky belief system. Please stick to your Iron Age sky spirit worship.

It's my understanding that sexual orientation and gender identity are different aspects, and there's hormonal and environmental issues involved as well as biological. Who you're sexually attracted to and which gender you identify with aren't necessarily related. And I don't think you can change either one easily. The idea is to identify the gender role that feels right to you, and then do the same with your sexual orientation. In this way, we can place the behavior on a spectrum rather than view it as "faulty". You look VERY not happy. Why do you think something's "not right" rather than just different? Can you share which gender you would prefer to identify with? What kind of person attracts you sexually?

! Moderator Note If you're tired, stop posting and go to bed.

My opinion of your guess is very low. I think you see a pattern you want to see. Humans are dependent on pattern recognition to the point where we often force its use. Prophecy and astrology are examples of this. Vague descriptions are easily assigned, and if they're even close we can convince ourselves of a match.

! Moderator Note Science discussion forum. We don't do conspiracy, prophecy, or numerology. Evidence is the key.

We see this a LOT. Science is several difficult, complex, and overlapping fields of study, and often those who don't grasp it or invest themselves in its study come up with "alternatives" they've made up that make more sense to them. They often get a certain amount of glee pretending this kind of thinking is "disturbing" to mainstream scientists. It's another version of the "I'm not burdened with all your book-learning" argument. It assumes there's a special providence in ignorance, a magical quality in starting with a clean slate. I can see the attraction, if you think of it in terms of the tortoise & the hare in fable. Mainstream science seems plodding and obvious sometimes, and jumping to conclusions is far more fun. And then I remember that it's not about fun, and I become reasonable again.

This is my guess. You post like you want to disrupt what everyone else is doing so they can pay attention to you. LOTS of hijacks and off-topic posts. It's a shame, you seem very intelligent. One of the hallmarks of the scientific mind is that it's NEVER bored. There's always something interesting, but you have to be willing to be amazed. If you start out bored and ignorant, you'll remain that way. Oh, sweetie, no....

I missed where anyone said this at all, and I certainly didn't mention it, so I don't know why you quoted me as if it's a response to what I said. Part of discussion is responding to what's actually been said, otherwise everybody but you is superfluous. This actually isn't as important here as you think. Civility is what we want when it comes to personal behavior, but ideas should stand on their own merit (attack ideas, not people). I don't have to "respect" any idea, I just have to analyze it to see if it explains what it's supposed to. If it's a good idea, that becomes apparent when discussing it. If you hadn't made the decision long ago that science is wrong, the questions you ask would be different, and might help you solve your dilemma. You may have unintentionally blocked the path to learning by filtering out the explanations you didn't immediately understand. By way of analogy, it's like you're trying to drive to a certain city but you're convinced the GPS is lying to you, so you keep taking all kinds of shortcuts, going every way EXCEPT the way the navigation software advises. "Years of study" later, you're still nowhere near the city, and cursing the GPS device.

I've always maintained that our biggest problems economically are caused by mixing the goals of public and private ownership. Public works need to be as free from profiteering as possible, but we go out of our way to include private interests, and it almost always ruins the efforts. Every American can send a letter to any other American for the same low cost because the system wasn't designed for profit, but that's being derided as socialism instead of using the right tool for the right job. IOW, both major parties serve a different set of billionaires. The People need to reassert their ownership or we're going to end up with a king who owns everything again.

When I snip out the middle part of your OP, I think the answer to your title becomes more apparent. You've spent "years of study", but you've always rejected mainstream explanations. Now you're YEARS down the line, sounding pretty bitter, arguing with people who make this stuff work every day, YET you somehow believe you're a "better thinker" thinking up "better mouse traps", and blame it all on jealousy and hate?! Does that sound reasonable? You have to know what's inside the box very well before you have the capacity to realize you need to think outside it. Maybe the confidence of having their explanations actually work makes it seem like scientists "think they know everything". Explanations that work, that give us the power to predict what will happen next, this is what's important.

! Moderator Note What an ugly thing to say in a discussion about science. Nothing meaningful left here. Thread closed.

I'm not sure what that means. Does it mean you don't want to hear anything against epigenetics? I employed none, I assure you. In your vernacular, I was dead serious. My point was a scientific one. Many studies have been done. They don't support the person you were quoting. Sarcasm used = 0. Did you somehow think my response was aimed at you personally, rather than at the source of your epigenetic arguments? I attack ideas, not people.

Fuck THAT. Easy to say when you have publicly-funded healthcare during a pandemic. Compromise hasn't worked in the US since neo-conservatism took root.

I remember many people telling me not to let go of something once I had it. Protect what's yours, they told me. Don't let them take it away! But according to your article, Solomon had trouble recognizing things and people he'd seen before if there was anything different about them. If true, it sounds like he had an automatic way to cope with change. Anything different was simply a new thing.

Not sure it would be worth it for some extra salt. However, being a convert to the joys of a good confectionary matchup, I would recommend you find something uber sweet (dried cantaloupe or papaya leaps to the tongue) to counter your licorice. Licorice can be an acquired taste, but it has its own sweet notes to be admired. I think the point of that Dutch licorice is to let the flavors change and mix as you chew it, to get that right flavor tang. That said, there are also many varieties of salted licorice, and I doubt even aficionados love them all.

When I rewrite my memories, I usually give them an upgrade. Fish are a little bigger, hills are steeper, it was hotter or colder, the wait was longer, and it was more expensive or a lot cheaper. I also lose weight and get prettier.