Author Topic: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."  (Read 91895 times)

Online aitm

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #420 on: April 10, 2019, 12:29:24 PM »
I don't think evolution "considers" homosexuality, as it is a by-product not the "intended" ending. We have past genetics that indicate we evolved from a bi-sexual species. Genetics decide whether male or female, but we have seen multiple variations of material that produces both sex organs, and even in that there is or can be disparity in which organ is prominent. Surely if the wiring gets as little twisted we end up with Sally having a tally. or Rick having a clit, and just as surely, if we have genetic physical androgyny we must have variations of psychological androgyny.

But again, I approach this with what I consider common sense, which may or may not be at all correct.
A humans desire to live is exceeded only by their willingness to die for another. Even god cannot equal this magnificent sacrifice. No god has the right to judge them.-first tenant of the Panotheust

Offline Munch

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #421 on: April 10, 2019, 01:15:35 PM »
I don't think evolution "considers" homosexuality, as it is a by-product not the "intended" ending. We have past genetics that indicate we evolved from a bi-sexual species. Genetics decide whether male or female, but we have seen multiple variations of material that produces both sex organs, and even in that there is or can be disparity in which organ is prominent. Surely if the wiring gets as little twisted we end up with Sally having a tally. or Rick having a clit, and just as surely, if we have genetic physical androgyny we must have variations of psychological androgyny.

But again, I approach this with what I consider common sense, which may or may not be at all correct.

I remember a program some years ago starting John Barrowman in discussion with some experts in their attempt to discover the process of how homosexuality works ours and other species. One theory put forward was down to the woman and her own resistance, how the eggs when coming on contact with a male sperm, at first the genetic coding of the egg takes on that of the sperm, making it a balance or whatever it will turn into, but the more attempts at this, the females resistance to the sperms genetic coding has more resistances to it, and to coding comes more from the egg itself.

So for instance if a woman had several children over her life and most of them are male, its more likely she will have girls later on because of how her fertilization process works.
This was to give explanation for why if a woman gives birth to several heterosexual boys, why she would end up having a gay child later on, because the genetic makeup stirs the chromosomes towards that product.

I don't mind this theory, if its true it makes sense in my family, since mum had 4 children, be being the last, and as far was we know the others were straight, while she was certain I'd be a girl before I was born (she didn't ask to know my gender before hand).

'Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners' - George Carlin

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #422 on: April 10, 2019, 01:18:09 PM »
I say chemical (not necessarily imbalance just variance) ... other than chemistry, what other action does evolution serve?  It doesn't serve a higher purpose, just random mutation that in most cases dies off, and sometimes makes a new optimum.
Maybe purpose just emerges from consciousness as consciousness itself emerges from the interactions of billions of communicating nerve cells in brains, just as the wetness of water emerges from billions of H2O molecules. Reductionism is good for some ways of looking at the world, but it fails to take into account that you can go from the large scale to the small relatively easily, but it's hard to predict the large from the small. if all we knew about the world was atoms, we'd never know of the possibility of things like internets and family picnics in the park. So other ways of looking at the world are needed, that take into account this tendency of nature to emerge new properties. The universe is a creative process that continually writes new rules for different levels of organization. The boundaries of those levels are the interesting places, though.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2019, 01:33:08 PM by Unbeliever »
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #423 on: April 10, 2019, 01:40:06 PM »
But again, I approach this with what I consider common sense, which may or may not be at all correct.

Yeah, it's interesting how many counter-intuitive things we've learned as we started looking at the world through the lens of science, like the Earth not being flat, or that the sun doesn't go around the Earth. But, since common sense ain't so common, we'll take it as a working hypothesis.
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Offline Munch

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #424 on: April 10, 2019, 02:07:29 PM »
Yeah, it's interesting how many counter-intuitive things we've learned as we started looking at the world through the lens of science, like the Earth not being flat, or that the sun doesn't go around the Earth. But, since common sense ain't so common, we'll take it as a working hypothesis.

well to be fair, those in a position of knowledge back in the day use to think blood letting and leeches were an advancement in medical science.
All learning is relearning.
'Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners' - George Carlin

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #425 on: April 10, 2019, 02:29:09 PM »
Actually, they use leeches today in medicine.

Medicinal leech therapy—an overall perspective
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Offline Munch

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #426 on: April 10, 2019, 04:54:30 PM »
Actually, they use leeches today in medicine.

Medicinal leech therapy—an overall perspective

Well, they used them for pretty much anything back then, where as now we have the tech to understand what they actually do and even replicate it.
It's kind of like how they once discovered insulin, but could only use it by taking it from pig pancreas', nowadays they learned how to synthetically produce it.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2019, 05:43:58 PM by Munch »
'Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners' - George Carlin

Offline Baruch

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #427 on: April 10, 2019, 08:54:35 PM »
Doctors frequently latch onto the new miracle drug, only to find it not only doesn't cure everything but has nasty side effects on some people.  Medicine used to evolve a lot slower, so leaches were used for everything, for a long time.  George Washington I am told, actually died from his doctors, and overly enthusiastic blood letting (maybe including leaches).

http://www.medicalantiques.com/medical/Scarifications_and_Bleeder_Medical_Antiques.htm

Look part way down at the "scarificator" ... sheesh!
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ ła’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Offline Cavebear

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #428 on: April 14, 2019, 12:19:25 AM »
I don't think evolution "considers" homosexuality, as it is a by-product not the "intended" ending. We have past genetics that indicate we evolved from a bi-sexual species. Genetics decide whether male or female, but we have seen multiple variations of material that produces both sex organs, and even in that there is or can be disparity in which organ is prominent. Surely if the wiring gets as little twisted we end up with Sally having a tally. or Rick having a clit, and just as surely, if we have genetic physical androgyny we must have variations of psychological androgyny.

But again, I approach this with what I consider common sense, which may or may not be at all correct.

I would be interested in further discussion about your ideas.

For example "we evolved from a bi-sexual species".  How far back are you looking?  There certainly have been hermaphroditic species, but mostly invertebrates.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Offline Baruch

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #429 on: April 14, 2019, 05:39:56 AM »
I would be interested in further discussion about your ideas.

For example "we evolved from a bi-sexual species".  How far back are you looking?  There certainly have been hermaphroditic species, but mostly invertebrates.

Some people still are echinoderms ;-)
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ ła’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Offline Cavebear

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #430 on: April 14, 2019, 07:16:26 AM »
Some people still are echinoderms ;-)

Starfishes, sea urchins, sea cucumbers, etc?  You've GOT to be kidding.  Do you do this nonsense just to annoy people who know better?
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Online aitm

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #431 on: April 14, 2019, 10:44:59 AM »
I would be interested in further discussion about your ideas.

For example "we evolved from a bi-sexual species".  How far back are you looking?  There certainly have been hermaphroditic species, but mostly invertebrates.
perhaps "asexual" might be the better term. How far back? Hell I don't know. Why do male animals have nipples? At one time they were useful perhaps?
If you have a few minutes, look up "5 sexes revisted" by Anne Fausto-Sterling..( i think thats how it's spelled) her article from maybe the late 80's early 90's got me to realize that physical androgyny and psychological androgyny are tightly intertwined into a vast variety of sexualities.

I have pictured in my mind two sets of the alphabet. A-Z then below it another A-Z but offset like this:
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
                       ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQUSTUVWXYZ

Consider the top line to be male and the bottom female. But more importantly you have to visualize as being in the same line, overlapping at the same time. The alpha male has no "female" tendencies while the Z female has no "male" tendencies. We have all met the ultra alpha,,extremely assertive, dominant, aggressive. Very few of them. And we have met the ultra Z female. Extremely docile, meek, almost sugar sweet, very few of them as well. As we progress further into towards the center the males gain more femininity and the females gain more male. Somewhere in the middle we have complete  androgyny. A human with equal amounts of both sexual identities. Very few of them as well. But the mass of humanity lay not in the extremes but in the outer thirds where we all have some traces of both sexes of varying degrees. We see it all the time in the behavior of each other but don't view it as such. I am not an aggressive person, but when provoked can be, but it takes work to get me to that point. I have a "female" side that makes me more  sentimental than many men, but not as much as some. As we move away from pure androgyny we find homosexuality as male or female possess a much higher value of the opposite sexes attributes. The further we move away from the center the less of the opposite sexes attributes and  we gradually have males getting more and more aggressive.
A rather simplistic and probably erroneous view of human sexuality. But it is something that if we think about all the people we grew up with and how different males are from each other in their aggressivness and overall "maleness" we can see there is a great deal of variation. It is estimated 1-1.5% of humanity have both sets of genitalia in varying degrees. This to me tells me that psychological androgyny must exist with equal importance.

Again, a rather simplistic version of my "theory".

edit: Here is a pretty good article today at CNN:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/13/health/intersex-child-parenting-eprise/index.html
« Last Edit: April 14, 2019, 02:33:18 PM by aitm »
A humans desire to live is exceeded only by their willingness to die for another. Even god cannot equal this magnificent sacrifice. No god has the right to judge them.-first tenant of the Panotheust

Offline Baruch

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #432 on: April 14, 2019, 01:58:07 PM »
Starfishes, sea urchins, sea cucumbers, etc?  You've GOT to be kidding.  Do you do this nonsense just to annoy people who know better?

My biology class says that chordates and echinoderms are cousins.  Chordates have been around for a long time, so this particular family spit was in the Cambrian Era or earlier.  But don't you think that spiny sea urchins is a good analogy for some people?  And don't count starfish out.  They are predators, slow but patient.

Nihilists though, clearly related to sea cucumbers.  Sea cucumbers evacuate themselves by turning themselves inside out so ...
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ ła’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Offline Cavebear

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #433 on: April 18, 2019, 10:29:32 AM »
perhaps "asexual" might be the better term. How far back? Hell I don't know. Why do male animals have nipples? At one time they were useful perhaps?
If you have a few minutes, look up "5 sexes revisted" by Anne Fausto-Sterling..( i think thats how it's spelled) her article from maybe the late 80's early 90's got me to realize that physical androgyny and psychological androgyny are tightly intertwined into a vast variety of sexualities.

I have pictured in my mind two sets of the alphabet. A-Z then below it another A-Z but offset like this:
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
                       ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQUSTUVWXYZ



Consider the top line to be male and the bottom female. But more importantly you have to visualize as being in the same line, overlapping at the same time. The alpha male has no "female" tendencies while the Z female has no "male" tendencies. We have all met the ultra alpha,,extremely assertive, dominant, aggressive. Very few of them. And we have met the ultra Z female. Extremely docile, meek, almost sugar sweet, very few of them as well. As we progress further into towards the center the males gain more femininity and the females gain more male. Somewhere in the middle we have complete  androgyny. A human with equal amounts of both sexual identities. Very few of them as well. But the mass of humanity lay not in the extremes but in the outer thirds where we all have some traces of both sexes of varying degrees. We see it all the time in the behavior of each other but don't view it as such. I am not an aggressive person, but when provoked can be, but it takes work to get me to that point. I have a "female" side that makes me more  sentimental than many men, but not as much as some. As we move away from pure androgyny we find homosexuality as male or female possess a much higher value of the opposite sexes attributes. The further we move away from the center the less of the opposite sexes attributes and  we gradually have males getting more and more aggressive.
A rather simplistic and probably erroneous view of human sexuality. But it is something that if we think about all the people we grew up with and how different males are from each other in their aggressivness and overall "maleness" we can see there is a great deal of variation. It is estimated 1-1.5% of humanity have both sets of genitalia in varying degrees. This to me tells me that psychological androgyny must exist with equal importance.

Again, a rather simplistic version of my "theory".

edit: Here is a pretty good article today at CNN:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/13/health/intersex-child-parenting-eprise/index.html

Nipples are developed before gender is actually physically determined by genes.  Genes don't all "kick in" at the same time.

https://www.livescience.com/32467-why-do-men-have-nipples.html

The brain develops in accordance to gender hormones at about the same time.  Sometimes there can be differences in development.  I don't think in any way that it is "wrong" that the brain and later interests in sex can go "off" evolutionary routines and demands, but I do think homosexuality is due to that.

Homosexuality is no more a "failure" than handedness is.  You can develop in the womb to be left or right handed just as being homosexual or heterosexual.  And I don't think it is anything MOM did or didn't do either. 

It just IS how one's amazing complex brain happened to develop before birth.

Forgive our language (or my language skills) not allowing the nuances I would like to make.  But I take this subject seriously and from an evolutionary point of view with as little judgement as I can.

Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Offline Baruch

Re: "I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."
« Reply #434 on: April 18, 2019, 03:24:01 PM »
Good post ... shows more effort, less fanaticism,
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ ła’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.