Theory of being gay

[ballcaphair]

No, homosexuality does not exist throughout the animal kingdom, sexuality does. Animals have no concept of homo or hetero sex, just sex. I have never yet heard of an animal exclusively seeking out sex with it's own gender, except man. pansexual animal sex maybe, but not exclusively homo sex.

Remember, the entire human genome has been mapped now and they have not found the "gay" gene.

Sir, Do your homework. Animals, almost every species, exhibit homosexual or bisexual behavior. Do your homework. We are just another animal. (Well we do have access to the internet.)

 

[eastofeden]

Hmmm...

I think being gay means we won the sexual identity lottery..that we are lucky...

...but on another note....we are Mother Nature's best defense.....overpopulation is killing her and the planet....so Mother Nature potentially figured out a way to survive....gay people...we aren't breeding like rabbits....

 

[JohnnyAnger]

Sir, Do your homework. Animals, almost every species, exhibit homosexual or bisexual behavior. Do your homework. We are just another animal. (Well we do have access to the internet.)

You might want to do some as well - Simon LeVay has shown that while homosexual behaviour is common in animals, it is incredible rare to see exclusively homosexual behaviour.

I personally see sexuality in the same way as Foucault, a construct created by our society.

 

[kallipolis]

Here's a reference to Foucault ideas:

http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.ed...=Outline_of_Michel_Foucault_The_History_o.pdf

 

[kallipolis]

Here's a reference to an interview with Simon LeVay discussing this topic:

http://www.lgbtscience.org/simon-levay/

 

[peeonme]

No it could be genetic and inherited, or congenital--the mother's hormone levels for instance. Either of those would be a physical difference as opposed to psychological or the result of parenting, abuse, etc. The gay voice suggests a physical origin for some individuals.

In post 9 you made reference to those who had:

There may be more than one cause, explaining the wide differenced among gays; masculine or feminine, dominant or submissive, pretty or rugged and varying degrees of each. Some have a "gay voice" but, i think a majority do not. But the gay voice and femininity are an indication that, for them, gayness is physical in origin.

I didn't realize that we had gone back in to the uterus in the end of your post. I am aware of the theory about the mothers hormone levels.

 

[rareboy]

I think 'sexuality' is a biological function but labelling it is a learned, moral construct, and morals are societal norms. So the 'cause' of homosexuality or heterosexuality is society.

Or it's a remnant from a past life, that works too .

What nonsense.

 

[chrisrobin]

Theorize if you must, but all I know is that in Jr. High, the "guy across the locker room" was really cute. It wasn't something I had read about, nor had learned on some street corner. My attraction just was.

When I got to H.S., I went out for swimming. We worked out naked to "save money" or the coach was gay (or maybe both). Anyway, I think I got a glimpse of what Heaven must be like.

But all the wasted years of self-loathing...

It took me a long time to realize that all of that was okay. To all you young guys, you're okay too.

 

[rareboy]

I knew that I was different at the age of 4...my attractions were totally to handsome or pretty males..and I declared at that age that I wanted to be dress designer. By the time I was 10, I knew that I was a homo. I had no interest at all in women from a sexual perspective.....I only know that I found only men attractive.

I came from a totally traditional and warm family relationship...there certainly was no societal influence and there was a perfectly balanced input in my upbringing from males and females in the family.

Homosexuality, like other conditions, runs through our farming family and certainly quite identifiably back a few generations...again, not because of any societal conditioning or nurture.

 

[bishaven]

Theorize if you must, but all I know is that in Jr. High, the "guy across the locker room" was really cute. It wasn't something I had read about, nor had learned on some street corner. My attraction just was.

When I got to H.S., I went out for swimming. We worked out naked to "save money" or the coach was gay (or maybe both). Anyway, I think I got a glimpse of what Heaven must be like.

But all the wasted years of self-loathing...

It took me a long time to realize that all of that was okay. To all you young guys, you're okay too.

Yup, exactly right (that's what happened to me in Jr High in the locker room).....I wanted 2 guys on my team. Just instant tingling in my loins.

I wish we did have a swimming team back then. Might have saved me a lot of anguish and self doubts. And I'd have loved to have had your coach

And yup, time wasted....it sucks. But for me, it's been an evolution

 

[sixthson]

I'm not sure why people get upset when someone suggests that nurture could play a role in sexuality. Nurture or nature, no one woke up one day and decided to be gay. It just is.
Personally, I think it might be a combination. Or both. Or either. Or neither. Or none. In other words, I don't really care. I yam what I yam.

 

[purina]

^You are Popeye? Always felt those fights with Bluto weren't really about Olive Oyl.

 

[sixthson]

^You are Popeye? Always felt those fights with Bluto weren't really about Olive Oyl.

It was over Wimpy. "I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today".

 

[rareboy]

I'm not sure why people get upset when someone suggests that nurture could play a role in sexuality. Nurture or nature, no one woke up one day and decided to be gay. It just is.
Personally, I think it might be a combination. Or both. Or either. Or neither. Or none. In other words, I don't really care. I yam what I yam.

Easy answer. Almost smug.

But it does matter at the end of the day.

If society decides it is behavioural, the homophobes will look to behaviour modification ...like they have been over the last decades, with disastrous results for many young people.

Even the Catholic Church recognizes that homosexuality is innate, although their response to it is idiotic...except that it is something you can toss off a few hail Mary's for.

I get it. A lot of people are afraid that if they can isolate the genetic mutation that produces cock suckers instead of straight sons, they might try to manipulate that and exclude homos from being born altogether. Who knows. Maybe they might.

But I have to think that by the time we've found the biological basis, that either we won't care who people fuck, or we'll realize that manipulation is far beyond our ability.

 

[NotHardUp1]

If society decides it is behavioural, the homophobes will look to behaviour modification ...like they have been over the last decades, with disastrous results for many young people.

There is no if. Society decided over a century ago it was an elective behavior. Gay progress is eating away at that concept, and it matters not whether nurture or nature or both are the origin, as our present understanding is that it is innate by the time it is expressed sexually.

Unfortunately, there is a lot of unscientific injection of lore, anecdotes, and opinion about sexuality in absence of expansive and conclusive research. People take a case or two of transgenderism apparently present in childhood and extrapolate that homosexuality is also known to children before their adolescence. Although many gay boys do experience alienation and interpret it in hindsight as orientation, that is not proven, and there are plenty of examples of gay men who did not perceive themselves as gay before sexual attractions began in puberty.

There simply isn't a need for the answer to be one thing or another. The need is to be strong in the face of arguments that would allege that orientation can or should be changed, and we're doing that just fine. Behavioral science is just not as black and white as chemistry or physics, and we shouldnt' treat it as though it is.

 

[NotHardUp1]

But the gay voice and femininity are an indication that, for them, gayness is physical in origin.

Of course, the problem is, children are not raised in a vacuum. They learn behaviors, and speech is one behavior that is only learned, not innate. Left in the absence of an example, no child speaks on his own, but only babbles.

The accent that we speak is always learned. We simply do not begin speaking with a Cockney or Aussie accent by choice. We mimic.

And I've yet to hear a child have the gay voice before it became a trope on television, cinema, and internet. As a child, I never encountered a child who evinced a lisp or lilt until adolescence. It would probably be short work for a linguist to establish research controls and prove the point, but to what end? Again, society isn't going to reward such research and gay men themselves are prejudiced on the subject.

It isn't troubling to consider that there may be multiple origins for homosexuality, but it is damaging to suggest that gays are inherently effeminate. Some are feminine, and some are not. The club is not exclusive.

 

[Vannie]

I yam what I yam.

Must you make fun of Trumps complexion every chance you get?

 

[luckynumbah7]

Of course, the problem is, children are not raised in a vacuum. They learn behaviors, and speech is one behavior that is only learned, not innate. Left in the absence of an example, no child speaks on his own, but only babbles.

The accent that we speak is always learned. We simply do not begin speaking with a Cockney or Aussie accent by choice. We mimic.

And I've yet to hear a child have the gay voice before it became a trope on television, cinema, and internet. As a child, I never encountered a child who evinced a lisp or lilt until adolescence. It would probably be short work for a linguist to establish research controls and prove the point, but to what end? Again, society isn't going to reward such research and gay men themselves are prejudiced on the subject.

It isn't troubling to consider that there may be multiple origins for homosexuality, but it is damaging to suggest that gays are inherently effeminate. Some are feminine, and some are not. The club is not exclusive.

I know a couple trans guys that are straight and have that kind've speech pattern/lilt; I'd put hard money on behavior expected from adolescence/mimicry; ain't because they're gay, it's because certain behavior was expected. I've known several straight cis guys as well with the same sound. I've seen some boys do that before adolescence as well but I figure it's from raising and playtmates because, well, children mimic like no one's business.

 

[sixthson]

Easy answer. Almost smug.

But it does matter at the end of the day.

If society decides it is behavioural, the homophobes will look to behaviour modification ...like they have been over the last decades, with disastrous results for many young people.

Even the Catholic Church recognizes that homosexuality is innate, although their response to it is idiotic...except that it is something you can toss off a few hail Mary's for.

I get it. A lot of people are afraid that if they can isolate the genetic mutation that produces cock suckers instead of straight sons, they might try to manipulate that and exclude homos from being born altogether. Who knows. Maybe they might.

But I have to think that by the time we've found the biological basis, that either we won't care who people fuck, or we'll realize that manipulation is far beyond our ability.

I'm sorry you choose to live in such fear. Besides your bomb shelter, you could always build a wall between Canada and the US and send us the bill.

 

[sixthson]

Must you make fun of Trumps complexion every chance you get?

Talking about Trump's spray-on tan makes a nice break from talking about your teeth, don't you think?