Homosexual Gene?

[Dave]

NO, it won't be. But it still would be a genetic "abnormality" and treated as a disease.

 

I'm still not convinced tbh, and I don't really want to drag this entire thread into the world of politics and whatnot, so I will depart at this point.

 

I'm saying these things will definately happen, but I'm saying it's a likely route.

 

I think you need a "not" in there somewhere

[Sayonara]

I'm sure there will be people who would jump at the chance to call gays genetically inferior; just as there would be people who would cite it as elegant evidence of selectively mediated population control, and a highly advanced social altruism mechanism.

[HNO3]

Even if there was a gay gene, it would have to be quickly dying out, because perverts can't have children as perverts.

[coquina]

I'm not a geneticist by any stretch of the imagination, but isn't a genetic disease more things like Down's Syndrome and the like? On the risk of straying off-topic (and making myself looking like a complete fool), I certainly don't think that having homosexual tendencies can possibly be classed in the same category as such serious diseases as these.

 

I don't mean to drag this off-topic either - but I think I can compare the situation of whether there is a "homosexual" gene to that of whether or not there is an "alzheimers gene"

 

Alzheimer's is rife in my dad's side of the family. There seems to be a gene that gives one a predisposition to it, and one can go to be tested to see if one has the gene.

 

There are two problems.

 

1. Until somebody can do something about it - will it really benefit me to know.

 

2. Considering who has access to your medical files - if that becomes a part of it, and some insurance company gets wind of it - what will happen if I try to buy long term care insurance, or life insurance. Taken a step further, considering I am 55, if I apply for a bank loan, is somebody going to be able to access this data and find out.

 

If there homosexuality is somehow linked to a gene, think of the implications.

 

I would expect that, just as all people who carry the alzheimer's gene will not get the disease, all people who carry the "homosexual" gene - if there is one, will not exhibit the "syndrome" ( I don't know what to call it - it's certainly not a "disease" - but I don't think it's a choice either.) Anyway - I can see insurance actuaries adding dollars to the premium for what they perceive to be an increased incidence of AIDS.

 

Bottom line, I guess, is that although I would like to understand people who are homosexual, I do not. That doesn't mean I am not able to accept and be friends with, people who are gay.

 

I would compare it to people who come up to me because I am a widow and say, "I know just how you feel, my cat just died." No, you do not know how I feel. Just give me a hug and keep your mouth shut.

 

So...I will do the same thing...

[ecoli]

Even if there was a gay gene, it would have to be quickly dying out, because perverts can't have children as perverts.

 

Pervert's and Gay's aren't the same thing...Careful what you say, you don't know who you'll offend

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pervert

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=homosexual

[Mokele]

Pervert's and Gay's aren't the same thing

 

Well, sometimes they are. See, the fashion's better *and* the sex is more interesting!

 

Mokele

[ecoli]

*Groan*

[Sayonara]

Even if there was a gay gene, it would have to be quickly dying out, because perverts can't have children as perverts.

What?

 

How did you manage to pack so many things that are obviously wrong into that one sentence?

[Braddock]

Heres my 2 cents. You've all touched on pretty much every facet of the gay issue. But all the rhetoric aside, It boils down to the fact that its a desire and whether or not its wrong or right. Are criminals born? To a certain extent I would say yes. Or for better terms, Born with a predisposition to display deviant behavior. But, As a society, We have decided what is acceptable and what is not and have layed down laws which we hope will control these devient actions. Sometimes I wanna kick my buddies ass because he smoked in my house after Ive asked him 30 billion times not to. But I refrain from that desire because I know its an undesirable form of behaving. The same goes for homosexualality. Society has always frowned upon it and always will. Let me clarify, Not the desire, But the carrying out of the desire is frowned upon.

[atinymonkey]

How did you come to that conclusion? It seems very much like your saying you frown on homosexuality, so people should refrain from it. I'm pretty sure that's not what you mean though.

[Mokele]

Society has always frowned upon it and always will.

 

Fallacy: arguement from tradition.

 

Just because we have done something continuously in the past does not mean that we will continue to do so, nor does it mean we *should* continue to do so.

 

Mokele

[Sayonara]

Sometimes I wanna kick my buddies ass because he smoked in my house after Ive asked him 30 billion times not to. But I refrain from that desire because I know its an undesirable form of behaving. The same goes for homosexualality. Society has always frowned upon it and always will. Let me clarify, Not the desire, But the carrying out of the desire is frowned upon.

Homosexuality cannot be characterised as being a "desire", so there goes that. If it can, then so must heterosexuality.

 

Society has never had the right to police who can have which fundamental feelings, and it never will. Perhaps some elements of society do frown upon homosexuality (or, and I think this is what you're referring to in place of the actual issue, male-male sex) but to be quite frank it's none of their business. As Mokele points out: argument from tradition. I'd also add argument from common practice.

[coquina]

I'm sure there will be people who would jump at the chance to call gays genetically inferior; just as there would be people who would cite it as elegant evidence of selectively mediated population control, and a highly advanced social altruism mechanism.

 

The bit about population control is intriguing - I wonder if we all have genes that only get "turned on" when some external pressure is applied? I wonder if there is a higher incidence per capita of homosexuality in highly populated areas?

[Sayonara]

It's been demonstrated in various animals in the lab, but of course that doesn't necessarily mean it holds true for all species.

[syntax252]

I don't know about you guys, but I don't find the idea of two females having sex together, any where near as inappropriate as two males having a sexual relationship.

 

What does that make me? Chauvinistic?

[coquina]

I don't know about you guys' date=' but I don't find the idea of two [b']females[/b] having sex together, any where near as inappropriate as two males having a sexual relationship.

 

What does that make me? Chauvinistic?

 

I presume you are male yourself - you could place yourself in one scenario, but not in the other.

 

Sayo...

Yeah - I remember that crowded rats turn to cannibalism, single-sex love is a definite improvement on that possibility.

[Sayonara]

I don't know about you guys, but I don't find the idea of two females having sex together, any where near as inappropriate as two males[/b'] having a sexual relationship.

This seems to be a common attitude among males. There must have been some research into it already, because it's a particularly odd kind of discrimination.

[syntax252]

This seems to be a common attitude among males. There must have been some research into it already, because it's a particularly odd kind of discrimination.

 

Actually, I am kind of turned on by it.

 

I suppose it could be seen as somehow discriminatory, but I suppose a lot of sexual things are that way.

[Sayonara]

Depends how you look at it I suppose.

 

Discriminatory wasn't a choice of word I was happy with, but I couldn't think of a better one at the time.

[syntax252]

Depends how you look at it I suppose.

 

Discriminatory wasn't a choice of word I was happy with' date=' but I couldn't think of a better one at the time.[/quote']

 

I don't know about others, but with what little kinky sex that I have been involved in, I had a sense of mastery over the female(s) involved. They were there to serve ME.

 

This is somewhat different than what I would term as "conventional" sex.

 

No abuse involved, you understand, always gentle and kind, but with a completely different feeling than I would have for someone that I was emotionally involved with, or that I considered to be a peer.

 

That is why I do not look down upon homosexuals even though I could never be involved in that sort of a thing.

[Sayonara]

 

I don't really see the connection.

[syntax252]

 

I don't really see the connection.

 

I don't know that there is one.

 

I was just speaking to the fact that a lot of people have little kinks that other people muight think is, well, "funny".

[john5746]

I don't know about others' date=' but with what little kinky sex that I have been involved in, I had a sense of mastery over the female(s) involved. [/b'].

 

There is your answer. You don't want to be "mastered".

 

I don't know about you guys, but I don't find the idea of two females having sex together, any where near as inappropriate as two males having a sexual relationship.

 

I wonder if this is a natural response. I feel the same way as you, but it is hard to tell if I learned it or not. It is so engrained in our society.

[Sayonara]

There is your answer. You don't want to be "mastered".

Sorry, but I don't see how that's his answer.

 

 

 

I wonder if this is a natural response. I feel the same way as you, but it is hard to tell if I learned it or not. It is so engrained in our society.

Natural or not, it must have a cause.

[syntax252]

There is your answer. You don't want to be "mastered".

I am not sure what you mean by this' date=' but if you mean that that is why I could not be involved in a homosexual relationship, that is not it.

 

Homosexuality between males is an absolute turnoff to me, either from the standpoint of an abserver,[b'] or[/b] as a participant.

 

Now, as I said, between women, that is another story.