"I Still Believe Homosexuality is a choice..."

Started by Aletheia, December 04, 2014, 03:54:27 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

SoldierofFortune

All i wanna say about the subject matter is that i have never choose to feel like a man; i just was born with the feeling... So it's not a choice... it's the nature...

To be gay is not a preference... it comes by birth..

Unbeliever

Well sure, if homosexuality is a choice, then so is heterosexuality, right? I've asked people before when they chose to be heterosexual, and they just get pissed off and stop talking to me. But I don't run into that kind of hater very often, thank Zod.
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Cavebear

Quote from: Unbeliever on March 25, 2019, 05:41:37 PM
Well sure, if homosexuality is a choice, then so is heterosexuality, right? I've asked people before when they chose to be heterosexual, and they just get pissed off and stop talking to me. But I don't run into that kind of hater very often, thank Zod.

Neither is exactly a choice.  But one seems not to be evolutionarily important.  I've wondered how homosexuality continues through time.  It's obviously not genetic in a standard sense (obligite homosexuals can't pass along their genes after all).  One could be aesthetically or preferentially homosexual, of course.  Or bisexual. 

I don't much care personally.  There are more than enough people on the planet after all and some fewer might be better.  But I've always been vaguely curious as to what causes homosexuality.  I suspect it is probably neurological in the sense that the brain develops preferences while it organizes in our youth, but the cause sure seems hard to understand.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Munch

theres a theory that homosexuality could occur based on how the early fetus is formed in what goes into it. One study suggested that when its forming, the X and Y chromosomes are in contest with what develops, and its suggested, the more the same batch of DNA is introduced to the same Y chromosome to the same DNA of X chromosome, the X chromosome builds up a resistance to the Y developing its characteristics.
So the more one guy has sex with the same woman, the more chance their kids will become gay or female. I'm assuming it works the other way when lesbians and straight males are concerned.

I'm the 4th son my mother gave birth to,  we don't obviously know what my first and second brother would have been like since one died as a baby and the other died at 13, but my brother, her third son, is very straight, and had two sons himself.

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

trdsf

Quote from: Unbeliever on March 25, 2019, 05:41:37 PM
Well sure, if homosexuality is a choice, then so is heterosexuality, right? I've asked people before when they chose to be heterosexual, and they just get pissed off and stop talking to me. But I don't run into that kind of hater very often, thank Zod.
I've asked "choicers" to prove it's a choice by deciding to be gay for a year.  Inevitably, they say they can't... which means, of course, that it's not a fucking choice.
"My faith in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, it is total, and I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction of the Constitution." -- Barbara Jordan

Munch

Quote from: trdsf on March 29, 2019, 10:20:15 PM
I've asked "choicers" to prove it's a choice by deciding to be gay for a year.  Inevitably, they say they can't... which means, of course, that it's not a fucking choice.

I already know the excuses they make. "Well I can't pretend to be gay for a year because it's unnatural, unlike being hetero which is natural!"
These people are flat earthers
'Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners' - George Carlin

Cavebear

I'm not making any value judgements.  I'm pretty out of the game by any definition, one way or the other.  I really don't care about the details.

But if evolution is any clue, two sexes probably mean there is an expectation that they neurologically-wired to come together to reproduce.  It is sort of the point (from a natural selection POV)...  I suppose I generally wonder what makes some people not go that way.

I equally wonder why all people aren't theists or why all people aren't atheists.

It's not a matter or any sort of right or wrong, just a "why"?  And I am a "why" sort of person.  Just as I assume there there is some general default heterosexual brain-bias (or there wouldn't be so many people on the planet), I assume there is some reason in our brain makeup that says some are not.

And its not like I am thinking there is some deity who demands there be more of us; there seems to be too many of us as there is.

But I'm pretty sure there is a basic neurological reason that most of us are heterosexual and therefore a neurological reason that some of us aren't. 

I just consider it to be a fascinating question.

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

Baruch

if you discuss pharmacology, humans as a species is a stretch, our individual biochemistry varies greatly (as shown by differential reaction to medicines).  We are individuals, who could theoretically mate.  That is a generalization brought to bear by the human need to organize.  It doesn't exist in nature, no more than race does.  This is also shown how you can artificially mate such different cats as lions and tigers.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Cavebear

Quote from: Baruch on April 02, 2019, 07:41:11 AM
if you discuss pharmacology, humans as a species is a stretch, our individual biochemistry varies greatly (as shown by differential reaction to medicines).  We are individuals, who could theoretically mate.  That is a generalization brought to bear by the human need to organize.  It doesn't exist in nature, no more than race does.  This is also shown how you can artificially mate such different cats as lions and tigers.

It isn't "pharmacology".  It isn't "our individual biochemistry".  It isn't that  there "are individuals, who could theoretically mate".  It isn't that we could "artificially mate [like] such different cats as lions and tigers".  Males and females of all species generally mate, by nature.

Sexual attractions exist in nature, though race does not.

Don't make bad arguments; I resent it and will get harsh...
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Munch

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

Baruch

Quote from: Cavebear on April 02, 2019, 08:09:24 AM
It isn't "pharmacology".  It isn't "our individual biochemistry".  It isn't that  there "are individuals, who could theoretically mate".  It isn't that we could "artificially mate [like] such different cats as lions and tigers".  Males and females of all species generally mate, by nature.

Sexual attractions exist in nature, though race does not.

Don't make bad arguments; I resent it and will get harsh...

What?  Are you just being ideological?  I am more "gay" than you are, if truth be told.  Yes, many sexual attractions exist in nature (aka reality), nobody here disputes this.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

drunkenshoe

This topic shouldn't be unpinned. That's all.
"science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. ıt is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - tp

Cavebear

Quote from: Baruch on April 04, 2019, 07:22:02 AM
What?  Are you just being ideological?  I am more "gay" than you are, if truth be told.  Yes, many sexual attractions exist in nature (aka reality), nobody here disputes this.

I'm just trying to understand it in evolutionary terms...  I actually do think that way.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

trdsf

Quote from: Cavebear on April 02, 2019, 06:54:22 AM
I'm not making any value judgements.  I'm pretty out of the game by any definition, one way or the other.  I really don't care about the details.

But if evolution is any clue, two sexes probably mean there is an expectation that they neurologically-wired to come together to reproduce.  It is sort of the point (from a natural selection POV)...  I suppose I generally wonder what makes some people not go that way.

I equally wonder why all people aren't theists or why all people aren't atheists.

It's not a matter or any sort of right or wrong, just a "why"?  And I am a "why" sort of person.  Just as I assume there there is some general default heterosexual brain-bias (or there wouldn't be so many people on the planet), I assume there is some reason in our brain makeup that says some are not.

And its not like I am thinking there is some deity who demands there be more of us; there seems to be too many of us as there is.

But I'm pretty sure there is a basic neurological reason that most of us are heterosexual and therefore a neurological reason that some of us aren't. 

I just consider it to be a fascinating question.
Well, it seems pretty clear that homosexuality must serve an evolutionary purpose, or it would have pretty rapidly been wiped out, genetically speaking.

I think the best theory offered so far is that it frees up individuals to assist with child rearing who don't themselves add to the tribe's child-rearing 'burden' (loaded term, I know, but I trust you know what I mean -- well, other than Baruch who will inevitably dash off to some ludicrous extreme in order to completely fail to make a point).

Basically people like me serve the purpose of enhancing quality of life for the familyâ€"both immediate and extendedâ€"without adding to the quantity of it.  And I think it's pretty easy to make a case for the evolutionary advantage of a quality life over simply having more and more and more kids.

It's not a settled point in evolutionary theory, but it's a reasonable one.
"My faith in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, it is total, and I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction of the Constitution." -- Barbara Jordan

Baruch

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.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.