Genetic Regions Influencing Male Sexual Orientation Identified

[saymyname]

natural instinct for a male without any genetic issues is to have sex with a female and to make offspring. Natural instinct for a female is to find a suitable male. I dont see how you can just deny this its survival instinct without it we wouldnt be here... I think you need to do some research. I think the fact that humans can recreationally enjoy sex can complicate things though..

Homosexuality has been around as long as heterosexuality.

Internalized homophobia and heterosexism is an understatement for you!

By the way, our opinions are not based on being cynical from heterosexual relationships because we don't HAVE heterosexual relationships because we're GAY!

It's a shame how much cowardice and shame people bring on to this forum due to its inherent anonymity on the internet. Your entire argument is wrapped up in nonsensical biological determinism and essentialism. Poor thing.

 

[evanrick]

Uhhh.... If homosexuality rises im sure it could be bad for the human species, as mean as it sounds its going against natural instinct... Wouldnt you like to fix it if you could be as attracted to females as you were to males now and have a true chance to make a family of your own, our "purpose" in life?

your sure? how can you know for certain?
nobody can, i dont think anyone is smarter millions of years of evolution.

 

[BRIOHAZARD]

Have they found the genetic regions influencing pedophilia?
Have they found out why pedophiles are attracted to children?

This doesn't explain homosexuality, just that we have different genetics then our heterosexual brethren.

"Our study helps to establish that genes play an important role in determining whether a man is gay or heterosexual,"

It's "gay or straight" or "homosexual or heterosexual". NOT "gay or heterosexual".

 

[Bicuriousaussie]

By the way, our opinions are not based on being cynical from heterosexual relationships because we don't HAVE heterosexual relationships because we're GAY!

i said he is being cynical *of* heterosexual relationships (not from experience but from
observation)

Your entire argument is wrapped up in nonsensical biological determinism and essentialism. Poor thing.

i'm saying i think excessive homosexuality would be bad for the human race. There is no arguing that.

 

[Bicuriousaussie]

your sure? how can you know for certain?
nobody can, i dont think anyone is smarter millions of years of evolution.

i don't think all genetic variations/mutations are there for a reason/purpose.

lets say there is 100 ducks, with 0% homosexuality the population thrives and grows. If a "homosexuality gene" is introduced and spread, common sense indicates at a certain h% the population will decrease and eventually the numbers dwindle down till the poor duck is extinct .

 

[Bicuriousaussie]

This is all theoretical based on the idea that homosexuality is genetic, btw.

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

i'm saying i think excessive homosexuality would be bad for the human race. There is no arguing that.

Except there IS arguing that and that's what we're doing.

I happen to think that more gay people in the world would make it a better place. There would be fewer unwanted kids... we'd have families, yes, but there wouldn't be those countless accidental kids that straight people drop like litter.

We'd have a better society where people were more altruistic and supportive of their community. And hey.. what's wrong with that?

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

i don't think all genetic variations/mutations are there for a reason/purpose.

lets say there is 100 ducks, with 0% homosexuality the population thrives and grows. If a "homosexuality gene" is introduced and spread, common sense indicates at a certain h% the population will decrease and eventually the numbers dwindle down till the poor duck is extinct .

That's silly. With 100% straight ducks, the population just grows and eventually becomes bigger than the duck pond can handle.

But with a few queer ducks, the unwanted chicks have childless couples to care for them. The gay ducks can make valuable contributions to the community but don't add to population growth meaning a smaller community but more community support.

 

[Bicuriousaussie]

Sure, a few queer ducks perhaps but where would you draw the line to it being excessive? I think when contraceptive technology advances, less of these unwanted babies will be born.

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

Sure, a few queer ducks perhaps but where would you draw the line to it being excessive? I think when contraceptive technology advances, less of these unwanted babies will be born.

"draw the line?" We don't need to.

Biology and genetics have given the gift to humanity at about 5% gay people and I guess, ducks.

And there's been condoms, IUDs, birth control pills, contraceptive foams, implants, vasectomies and the morning after pill for years and years and years and straight people can't even get it together enough to use them. It's clear that straight people are incapable of a little self-control.

We don't need any more "contraceptive technology advances," we need more gay people to counter-act the out-of-control breeding of heterosexuals.

But here... let's give Harvey the last word.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGwIZJMtR8Q[/ame]