View Poll Results: Is Homosexuality A Choice?

Voters
259. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    44 16.99%
  • No

    171 66.02%
  • Maybe/Don't Know

    44 16.99%
Page 15 of 132 FirstFirst ... 513141516172565115 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 1318

Thread: Is Homosexuality A Choice?

  1. #141
    Student
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Eastern USA
    Last Seen
    08-13-13 @ 09:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    166

    Re: Is Homosexuality A Choice?

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    Finally, when humans reach the age where they can physically participate in sex, they can still chose how to act on this.

    Having sifted through all this evidence myself over the years, I have come to believe that it is not truly a choice. However I acknowledge that there may be factors I am unaware of and so I may be wrong. Therefore I would pick "I Don't Know" with the caveat that it does not really matter to me whether it is a choice or not, because as long as all parties engaged in such activities are willing and able then it is perfectly alright with me.
    I was with you and thought it was a choice up until the first sentence of the last paragraph. It seems to contradict the paragraph before it. Overall, I glean a sense of great variety from your post. Variety that dispels the labels and motivations we try to assign in today's society.

  2. #142
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,535
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is Homosexuality A Choice?

    Quote Originally Posted by USNavySquid View Post
    I've used that example myself. The most frequent response is that "there is more to sexual orientation that getting off." But what more... and to what degree and how many people agree with this? I have tried to reason what defines our orientation: Who we prefer to receive sexual pleasure from, who we fall in love with or both? People have given me different answers. I have guessed that even love is a physical reaction to repeated exposure. Emotions are simply chemical reactions.... proteins and enzymes being synthesized, stored, released and sent through the body. This narrows it down to orientation having physical roots. The variable, I guessed, is who we pay attention to. In my opinion, that is a matter of choice.
    The problem with your example is that it ignores this scenario. Boy sitting next to Girl feels nothing when he realizes he has touched her breast. Boy sits next to boy, their legs touch, and he suddenly feels good. He hasn't made a conscious choice, he simply has no feeling for girls while he seems to have it for at least that particular boy.

    But, and here is when your issues of emotional attraction truly come into play, there is no need for same-sex interest to involve ALL males in order to establish homosexual orientation, only that subset of males found personally attractive. It's no different for heterosexual desires; few men find ALL women attractive and vice versa. Then comes the physical and emotional issues involved in seeking and obtaining what one finds attractive.

  3. #143
    Student
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Eastern USA
    Last Seen
    08-13-13 @ 09:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    166

    Re: Is Homosexuality A Choice?

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    The problem with your example is that it ignores this scenario. Boy sitting next to Girl feels nothing when he realizes he has touched her breast. Boy sits next to boy, their legs touch, and he suddenly feels good. He hasn't made a conscious choice, he simply has no feeling for girls while he seems to have it for at least that particular boy.

    But, and here is when your issues of emotional attraction truly come into play, there is no need for same-sex interest to involve ALL males in order to establish homosexual orientation, only that subset of males found personally attractive. It's no different for heterosexual desires; few men find ALL women attractive and vice versa. Then comes the physical and emotional issues involved in seeking and obtaining what one finds attractive.
    But Why does the boy feel nothing when he touches the girl's breast. Until we know that, we can not judge. Nor can we judge until we know whether it is a habitual response or a fluke. The lack of response may have been due to the amount of attention he was putting into the book he was reading. At another time, he may have a strong reaction to that breast. It is a matter of attention, first and foremost in my opinion. If attention was not paid to that breast, then no other reaction will be possible. Unawareness is not a reaction.

    I agree with the second point. However, attraction is relative. If I'm heterosexual and surrounded by ugly girls, I'll probably still stick my &*() in one. The standard changes based on the selection.

  4. #144
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,535
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is Homosexuality A Choice?

    Quote Originally Posted by USNavySquid View Post
    I was with you and thought it was a choice up until the first sentence of the last paragraph. It seems to contradict the paragraph before it. Overall, I glean a sense of great variety from your post. Variety that dispels the labels and motivations we try to assign in today's society.
    I can see the confusion but from the examples given I had hoped it would have been clear what my actual position was. When I said "choice to act" I did not mean choice of orientation, only how the person might choose to act on his sexuality based on either a willingness to comform to normative behaviors or a determination to not comform and instead act on his actual desires.

  5. #145
    Student
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Eastern USA
    Last Seen
    08-13-13 @ 09:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    166

    Re: Is Homosexuality A Choice?

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    I can see the confusion but from the examples given I had hoped it would have been clear what my actual position was. When I said "choice to act" I did not mean choice of orientation, only how the person might choose to act on his sexuality based on either a willingness to comform to normative behaviors or a determination to not comform and instead act on his actual desires.
    But isn't how he chooses to act indicative of his orientation? I don't necessarily believe it is. Just asking the question. In fact, I don't necessary believe that orientation is a static trait. I fathom that having one or another orientation is a temporary condition. Given a long enough timeline, it can change.

  6. #146
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,535
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is Homosexuality A Choice?

    Quote Originally Posted by USNavySquid View Post
    But Why does the boy feel nothing when he touches the girl's breast. Until we know that, we can not judge. Nor can we judge until we know whether it is a habitual response or a fluke. The lack of response may have been due to the amount of attention he was putting into the book he was reading. At another time, he may have a strong reaction to that breast. It is a matter of attention, first and foremost in my opinion. If attention was not paid to that breast, then no other reaction will be possible. Unawareness is not a reaction.
    Well I was trying to conform to your original scenario. Perhaps a better example is the sole boy in an evironment full of girls. Regardless of orientation, all boys discover their penis has more than one function at some point in their physical development. They then discover the reaction caused by this second function can be created voluntarily. Yet this sole boy, surrounded by a bevy of developing girls, some of whom appear all to eager to help with this process, is unmoved and cannot get aroused by them or their attempts to stimulate him physically. Add now new girls he did not grow up with, and he still lacks all interest. This despite their interest and physical attempts to stimulate him. This satisfies your "attention" objection.

    Add now a new boy, and suddenly the first boy finds an attraction coupled with a physical response that he did not have for any of the girls. This new boy is completely disinterested and focuses all activity on the girls. By his example the first boy realizes his proper role, and that he too could achieve satisfaction with the girls yet still fixates on the new boy. You might say it is the novelty of similarity that causes this, but that would not explain his inability to get aroused by the efforts of the females when he was alone with them.

    Quote Originally Posted by USNavySquid View Post
    I agree with the second point. However, attraction is relative. If I'm heterosexual and surrounded by ugly girls, I'll probably still stick my &*() in one. The standard changes based on the selection.
    Can't quite agree with you here though, since if my choice was a lot of ugly girls or nothing...I'd take nothing...or actually moving away till I found something. lol

    Ok ok, maybe if there were NO OTHER OPTIONS in the pocket universe you've created i would reassess my standards.
    Last edited by Captain Adverse; 06-27-13 at 08:30 AM.

  7. #147
    Student
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Eastern USA
    Last Seen
    08-13-13 @ 09:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    166

    Re: Is Homosexuality A Choice?

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    Well I was trying to conform to your original scenario. Perhaps a better example is the sole boy in an evironment full of girls. Regardless of orientation, all boys discover their penis has more than one function at some point in their physical development. They then discover the reaction caused by this second function can be created voluntarily. Yet this sole boy, surrounded by a bevy of developing girls, some of whom appear all to eager to help with this process, is unmoved and cannot get aroused by them or their attempts to stimulate him physically. Add now new girls he did not grow up with, and he still lacks all interest. This despite their interest and physical attempts to stimulate him. This satisfies your "attention" objection.

    Add now a new boy, and suddenly the first boy finds an attraction coupled with a physical response that he did not have for any of the girls. This new boy is completely disinterested and focuses all activity on the girls. By his example the first boy realizes his proper role, and that he too could achieve satisfaction with the girls yet still fixates on the new boy. You might say it is the novelty of similarity that causes this, but that would not explain his inability to get aroused by the efforts of the females when he was alone with them.
    Now here we have a bunch of ideas I had not considered. I thank you for sharing them. I'll consider them and formulate a response.

    1. It seems, through your example, you are (purposefully or no) leading to the conclusion that there is a drive of some sort that acts on this boy. When I hear homosexuals talk about an internal drive, it seems similar to this. But I don't believe in an internal drive. One reason being that I have not seen research that proves its existence conclusively. And another reason being that I believe arousal is possible if attention is exercised and stress, fear, anxiety extinguished and social programming overcome.

    2. You've accounted for the novelty of similarity and I would have proposed that if you hadn't. How about the novelty of dissimilarity the boy feels towards the girls? They are strange and alien to him. On his own, he is too afraid or awed to perform with them. But the presence of the other boy makes him feel safe so he can enjoy the ministrations of the girl(s). This is something that can be strengthened so that the other boy is no longer needed as a crutch.

    3. But if you are saying that the boy fixates -as in fantasizes- about the other boy while the girls are touching him, and that is how he is able to perform...... I can't accept that at face value. What is the reason the girl can not provoke pleasure? Saying the boy simply has homosexual proclivities is circular and I can't accept it. I'll think about this some more.
    Last edited by USNavySquid; 06-27-13 at 08:47 AM.

  8. #148
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:16 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,290

    Re: Is Homosexuality A Choice?

    Quote Originally Posted by Removable Mind View Post
    Interesting. Who is Cameron?
    You asked.

    Homosexuality: Nature, Nurture, or Politically Correct?

    The question of the nature of homosexuality has become an issue of a

    significantly political, as well as, politically correct nature. Is it nature or nurture? The

    fact that the standard question has eliminated the psychological possibility is a politically

    correct success. The motivational politics of homosexuality are clarified by reading

    "Homosexual Conduct and the Law," by Irving J. Sloan:

    The earliest legal argument for outlawing homosexuality is found in

    Plato's Laws ... Prohibitions on male homosexuality in the Old Testament,

    "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an

    abomination (Leviticus: 18:22). . . ." "If a man also lie with mankind, as

    with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall

    surely be put to death; their blood shall be them (Leviticus: 20:13)."(1)

    To paraphrase Sloan, death by burning, hanging, burying alive... exile, castration,

    corporal punishment, etc., have been politically correct solutions for homosexuality (2-4).

    This history presents some of the motivational forces driving advocacy groups to promote

    studies indicating a genetic link to homosexuality. Recent genetic studies have shown

    links to personality (Colt, George Howe, 1998), overall happiness, psychornotor reaction

    time (Simonen et al, 1998), mathematics disability (Alarcon, Marciela, 1997) and many

    factors which had been presumed to be the province of nurture (environment). Is there a

    genetic component to homosexuality as opposed to heterosexuality? This question begs

    for answers, and answers are available if one approaches the subject matter logically.

    In this age of computers, the logical starting place is established databases, and in

    this specific case, a database of twins would be ideal. Hershberger's study of the study

    by Lykken et al., "The Minnesota Twin Family Regist is exactly that and is used

    extensively by many of the authors whose works are cited on these pages. To paraphrase

    the study, twins registered in the State of Minnesota from 1936 to 1955 were sent

    questionnaires, the replies allowing analysis of whether or not the twins were

    monozygotic (identical) or dizygotic (fraternal). The questionnaire also requested the

    twin~ sexual orientation, his/her twil sexual orientation, his/her non-twin siblings sexual

    orientation, marital status, sexual orientation before age 25 and after age 25, and the

    number and frequency of sexual encounters with persons of the same or opposite sex (3

    of 3, 5,6,7 of 7).

    An initial study of the Australian Twin Registry database by Michael Bailey of

    Northwestern and Richard Pillard of the Boston School of Medicine was highly

    publicized internationally as the proof of a high genetic influence for



    homosexuality (Shapiro 4 of 6),,The study was refuted by one of the authors in a

    subsequent and much less publicized study, as documented by Jones in "The Incredibly

    Shrinking Gay Gene ... .. Michael Bailey of Northwestern has produced a study that

    refutes his earlier research conducted with Richard Pillard of the Boston School of

    Medicine, which claimed that there is a high genetic influence on homosexuality "(53).

    In this same study " Only 3 pairs of identical male twins were both homosexual out of a

    total of 27 male identical twin pairs where at least one twin was homosexual"(53). These

    27 pairs had 100% gene match in the individual twin pairs. If the gene was a significant

    influencing factor, the incidence of homosexuality for both twins should have been much

    higher. This is saying that homosexuality is not a genetic marker. These are identical

    twins with same color eyes (genetic marker), same hair color (genetic marker), near

    100% shared attributes (genetic markers), but no genetic marker for homosexuality.

    Actually, 10% of the pairs were both gays, which begs a question.

    Did the twin participant questionnaires used in the study ask if the twins were

    raised by one or more gay parent/s? This is significant because children of gay parents

    are 10 times (30%) as likely to be gay as the general population (3%)(Cameron, 1997, 8

    and 9 of 14). In a twin study this is significant because it could cause sample bias. If this

    error is not eliminated from any twin study an implication of genetic causation for

    homosexuality will result; however, it will be a very small implication statistically. For

    example, relate to the 27 pairs of twins and if one parent was gay (I in 33, or 3% would

    be the average), then it is a strong possibility that one of the homosexual pairs could have

    been caused by that factor and it dilutes an already minimal percentage (10%) to a lower

    percentage (7.4%). It is worth noting again that this genetic marker is the same marker

    that causes the 100% match of hair color and many other attributes that motivate the

    researcher to choose a monozygotic twin study for meaningful analysis.

    In a Minnesota Twin Registry study, "A Twin Registry Study of Male and Female

    Sexual Orientation" by Hershberger, this data is analyzed with particular emphasis on the

    monozygotic twins, because this represents an identical gene match (100%). This is

    important for the purpose of the study because it would indicate that the sexuality of the

    one twin has to be exactly the same for the co-twin if genetics causes the sexual

    orientation. As in the Australian study, this is not the case, as this quote from the

    Hershberger study reveals.

    For men, depending on the criterion used, the prevalence of homosexuality

    ranges for 1.06% to 3.24%, with an average of 2.49%; for women, the

    range is from.55% to 2.11%, with an average of 1.68%. If combined with

    bisexuality, the average rises to 4.57% for men and 3.26% for women.

    These rates of homosexuality are very similar to those found in studies

    using probability samples conducted in the United States and elsewhere(4

    of 9 in 2 of 3).

    The Hershberger study also states; "Specifically, significant genetic effects were

    found for self-identified female homosexuality, but not for male homosexuality, in both

    the twin and extended family analyses."(5 of 9 in 2 of 3) The questionnaire used for this

    study is included (6 of 7 and 7 of 7 in 3 of 3), and the question of gay parents is not

    included, causing the same potential flaws as indicated for the Australian study.

    In the case of monozygotic twins, any marker that does not match is the deviation.

    The deviation should be measured against 100%, meaning the further away from 100%

    (which is the expected match), the greater the proof that the factor is not genetic. If twins

    do not have the same eye color, they are not monozygotic, meaning no 100% gene match.

    Does this statement sufficiently dramatize genetic correlation?

    The factual conclusions do not support a link between genetics and

    homosexuality. Many institutions have attempted to stand on high moral ground by

    giving generous interpretations of minimal statistical data implying genetic

    homosexuality. The data should be overwhelming, if true, in a monozygotic twin study,

    most certainly not a minimal statistic. The ABCNEWS.com special, "Nurture, Not

    Nature" concludes that a sense of humor is not genetic (1). Overall happiness: however,

    is genetic as acknowledged by Simonen et al (1998). Asa reminder, referring to Emma

    Wilson's, "Textuality and (homo) Sexuality in Tournier's Les Meteores" to acknowledge

    the psychological inferences, in this case, narcissism, regarding homosexuality might be

    enlightening (9 of 9). The backlash caused by the historical overreaction to

    homosexuality is analogous to affirmative action. Do the words, "too much of a good

    thing," strike a responsive chord here?

  9. #149
    free market communist
    Gardener's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    09-30-17 @ 12:27 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    26,661

    Re: Is Homosexuality A Choice?

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    Go ahead. Go for it. You go right ahead and then let us know how that works out.
    Sure, I'll give it a go.


    Where would you like to meet?
    "you're better off on Stormfront discussing how evil brown men are taking innocent white flowers." Infinite Chaos

  10. #150
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:16 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,290

    Re: Is Homosexuality A Choice?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gardener View Post
    Sure, I'll give it a go.


    Where would you like to meet?
    You'd need a consenting adult. That's not me.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •