Guest bodiodo Posted October 14, 2004 Posted October 14, 2004 this is probably more of a joke than anything else but this is a miscillaneous observation/inquiry on the subject... the Ellen Degeneres Show...had a live audience for the taping. let me tell you' date=' these were some of the most hideous looking females i have ever seen. they were gay. they came in couples, holding hands. girl and girl, boy and boy. it was not a pretty sight...well the whole point that i'm getting to is this, when a person is born, i don't believe that they are gay...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?[/quote'] I appreciate the humor of what you're saying, Sepultallica. I see it only a little bit differently than you do: the unappealing appearance of the folks you saw in that audience isn't indicative of gay people in general, it's indicative of Ellen Degeneres' fan base. Doesn't matter if they're lesbian, gay males, or sympathetic straights: they don't look like the fashion and photo models we're accustomed to thinking of as "beautiful gay men" or "wholesome-looking dykes in sensible shoes". But then, those stereotypical images of gay people refute your theory that gay people are gay because they've been traumatized. What about the (commonly accepted standards of) beautiful-looking people who comprise such a visible part of gay culture in the U.S.? What about the (seemingly) happy, well-adjusted folks who comprise such a well-known part of gay culture in the U.S.? They probably don't fit into the same crowd that you noticed at Ellen's show. Or maybe they do... I remember during the gay rights protests of the late 1960s, one of the slogans we chanted was, "We are everywhere!" It's really true: hell, some of us are even in the least likely situation you can imagine: committed, mixed-sex marriages. This idea of "being everywhere" couldn't be more clearly exemplified than by the existance of the Log Cabin Republicans and (horrors!) the Abe Lincoln Log Cabin Republicans. (http://www.lcr.org and whatever the other URL is). Anyway, I laughed appreciatively at your observation about the studio full of ugly fans at Ellen's show, but felt like weighing in on why it's not a comprehensive view of gay people, and therefore can't account for their gayness. Thanks! Beau
Jthesnake08 Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 The bible talks about how homosexuality will come to pass, saying that men will be lovers of men and weman will be lovers of weman. The bible says it's wrong. The bible says that a man shall not lie down with a man and a women shall not lie down with a women. It is wrong. A person is not born this way. It is just how they coose to live. I am strongly aginst it. I wish they would bann it from being on t.v. and everywhere else in the media.It seems that every single t.v. show has to have someone gay on it. It's sad how people are this way and how they choose to be this way. If God wanted it to be this way, he would have created Adam and Steve instead of Adam and Eve.
Glider Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 I wish people would stop using articles of faith as evidence in debate.
SubJunk Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 Come on now, if we were going to take the bible's word for everything it would be a sorry state of affairs and God forgives everyone for everything anyway. No that's not an excuse to sin (just pre-empting your next post Jthesnake08) but it does mean just what it means. I don't believe anyone is born homosexual, but I do believe that because of certain influences in the world (whether it be violent upbringing or media) some homosexuals don't have a concious choice. Anyway, if the bible says it will come to pass, what are you worried about? p.s. I'm a heterosexual atheist.
philbo1965uk Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 ROFL....i enjoyed some of the posts here,really tackling the issue with no consideration that gay people would be horrified to read. Unfortunately there is enough data now (though i cannot point you to it on the net) that homosexuality is genetic..if i recall its something to do with the brain.. apparently this gene is on/off as the fetus is developing and the result is regardless of sex at birth your a homo! I realise its pretty basic but its true...i think its also linked to females in a mans body etc....we have a bloke walking around the cathedral city dressed every afternoon in a skirt,blouse,makeup,and Nike trainers.......he would look rather fetching if only he didnt have a beard ROFL...its true i swear..(hey i have a beard..oops)
SubJunk Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 I'd love for you to give some links and preferably some test data/references to back that up. i'm pretty sure i would've heard of that new genetic reason for being gay. As for transgenders, there is significant scientific evidence to say that's genetic, but it's still a completely different thing than being gay. Perhaps you got the two confused?
philbo1965uk Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 I stated that i couldnt offer any links on the net.But im sure if your intereted enough you could find it.Im not really inclined to go searching for homo stuff,i dont have a problem with it just not interested.As you agree about transgender being genetic you dont have to stretch your imagination that far to consider the link.... You would probaby get more insight finding a gay forum for yourself...i heard that many gay people testify to the fact that from being infants they new their sexual preference( hard to imagine an innocent child with no preconceptions of sex or experience of life,being attracted to their own sex as a conscious choice)
Sayonara Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 There's plenty of information about the biological factors involved scattered throughout all the homosexuality threads.
Sayonara Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 The bible talks about how homosexuality will come to pass, saying that men will be lovers of men and weman will be lovers of weman. The bible says it's wrong. The bible says that a man shall not lie down with a man and a women shall not lie down with a women. It is wrong. A person is not born this way. It is just how they coose to live. I am strongly aginst it. I wish they would bann it from being on t.v. and everywhere else in the media.It seems that every single t.v. show has to have someone gay on it. It's sad how people are this way and how they choose to be this way. If God wanted it to be this way, he would have created Adam and Steve instead of Adam and Eve. You do realise you are going straight to hell, don't you?
SubJunk Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 This must be done from some ground-breaking research that somehow wasn't made very public, because I havn't heard/read anything and it's something i'm very interested in and make a large effort to be informed in. I don't count, by the way, websites of homosexuals claiming a one off piece of evidence. We all know they think it's genetic, i've had many conversations with gay people who swear they "just are" gay, and I believe that they believe that. i do know that a test was done last year which proved that if you have an older sibling of the same sex your chances of being gay were increased by 1/7
Sayonara Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 Well, instead of speculating about the veracity of the information, why don't you use the forum search function to check for yourself. Peer review and so forth. I think fafalone and Glider gave most of the information if you want to narrow it down by username.
Jthesnake08 Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 I wish people would stop using articles of faith as evidence in debate. Well, as a christian, I put all my beliefs on the bible. Therefor, when I am gonna debate on something, I will put my religious beliefs towards that, becasue that is how I live.
Jthesnake08 Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 You do realise you are going straight to hell, don't you? I am, how? If I am a born-again christian, soon to be filled with the holy ghost, how am I gonna go to hell by fallowing Jesus. And plus I'm aginst sinful things such as homosexuality.
Sayonara Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 I am, how? If I am a born-again christian, soon to be filled with the holy ghost, how am I gonna go to hell by fallowing Jesus. And plus I'm aginst[/b'] sinful things such as homosexuality. Firstly, you aren't following Jesus by taking biblical messages and using them to excuse bigotry. In case you hadn't noticed, Jesus was a pretty laid back kind of character. Secondly, if you really do live by the bible, then you are committing a cardinal sin. Judge not lest you be judged. Thirdly, you are confusing homosexuality with the act of sex itself, which is a pretty stupid mistake to make when you're condemning about 500 million people. fallowing Jesus Wow, even your spelling mistakes are the same as Penticostal8's. Well, as a christian, I put all my beliefs on the bible. Therefor, when I am gonna debate on something, I will put my religious beliefs towards that, becasue that is how I live. This is a thread posted in the Psychiatry and Psychology forum, discussing the science of triggers for homosexuality. Narrow-minded interpretations of passages taken from religious texts are in no way invited, required or welcome. If you want to tell people about how the way you live your life doesn't allow any flexibility for dealing with other people's behaviour or disposition, or if you want to dictate morals to people, take it to the Religion and Philosophy section.
SubJunk Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 couldn't have said it better myself, try arguing that Jthesnake08
Sorcerer Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 Hmmmm; link philbo? I know about androgen insensitivity, but as far as I am aware there isn't a higher proportion of lesibians among XY individuals who have the phenotype of a woman. There was one study I read that was looking at the womb environment, it had to do with the hormone levels in the womb before birth, apparently the youngest boy in a family of serval boys was more likely to be gay. Even though this shows gay people are born like that, it doesn't show its genetic. Personally I think it could be both, it can be a life-style choice it can be effected by the environment. But its possible there are genes which control it, how these genes have been passed on is the question. For starters I would guess they were recessive so that they would only manifest themselves in a minority of the population, and hetrozygous individuals could pass them on (because they have offspring). I would also guess they are mulitple so that it would require more than one gene to produce a homosexual, and also it would allow for degrees of homosexual tendancies. Probably a good place to look for such genes would be the X chromosome, again just guessing, a study into the proportion of lesbians to gays would probably show if this was worth it or not. It would also be necessary for Homosexuals to indirectly influence the spread of their genes, since they aren't having offspring, they could instead provide resources for their siblings offspring, it could also be advatageous when times are hard and resources scarce, this is because there would be too much competition between family members for resources and this would be disadvantageous on the whole. So having some family members to be solely altruistic and childless would be an advantage for the family group who carried these genes. By the way, I am a heterosexual, while not homophobic, I haven't liked any gay people I have met. The guys are like sissy girls and u want to hit them and tell them to harden up, and they girls are even more up themselves and high strung than normal ones.
SubJunk Posted October 17, 2004 Posted October 17, 2004 Well if there was ever any doubt you were from New Zealand, it's surely gone now after that manly demonstration
Guest shai Posted October 18, 2004 Posted October 18, 2004 Why not take a Freudian approach? He thought homosexuality is caused mostly by the infant not being able to distinguish his/her parent's sex.
SubJunk Posted October 18, 2004 Posted October 18, 2004 *re-enacts that brilliant scene from Zoolander; makes monkey noises and bangs computer* me tarzan, you homo p.s. we need more emoticons on this forum
SubJunk Posted October 18, 2004 Posted October 18, 2004 that's interesting shai, do you know why he thought that might be?
Aardvark Posted October 20, 2004 Posted October 20, 2004 If Freud was right would that mean children with bearded Fathers are less likely to be homosexual? Or maybe if Mother has particularly prominent breasts.
Recommended Posts