Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Not sure what you mean about the college party scenario.Not worrying what his parents would think that boy might be more prone to banging some tranny at a drunkin college party one day but ultimately he either likes women or he doesn't.
I wonder, if it weren't looked on negatively by society, how many straight guys would let a gay guy give them head.
Do you have control over your sexual desires? Again, I'm talking about preference, not behavior.In my humble opinion, the only way you can claim homosexuality is genetic and not a choice is to say that homosexuality is unlike any other sexual proclivity and those who are homosexual have no control over their sexual desires. I don't believe that is true.
A small correction: "choice" would come under nurture/environment. The homophobic theory being two gay men raise a baby boy and that baby grows into a gay man. You and I appear agreed it doesn't work that way. Odds are, about 98%, that the boy will be straight since sexual preference is innate....What is perhaps even more ridiculous is that fact that -despite everything that has been presented here so far ( which you probably have not read because you are not really interested in learning anything) you continue to frame the question in terms of "genetic vs. choice" when the scientific community is focused on "nature (biology) vs nurture ( environment) and is not even considering "choice" in any serious way...
Do you have control over your sexual desires? Again, I'm talking about preference, not behavior.In my humble opinion, the only way you can claim homosexuality is genetic and not a choice is to say that homosexuality is unlike any other sexual proclivity and those who are homosexual have no control over their sexual desires. I don't believe that is true.
Most married men look at other women (preference), but most do not pursue that attraction (behavior). Any married man who claims he's never looked at another woman is probably gay, neutered or lying.
What are you jabbering about? It's apparent that you are terribly confused about the difference between lifestyle choices and sexual orientation. Yes, those who are bisexual can and do, at various points in there life, chose to live as and have relationships which people of the same or opposite gender. They are still bisexual- as fixed sexual orientation as is homosexual and heterosexual. That does not mean that sexual orientation is a choice.A small correction: "choice" would come under nurture/environment. The homophobic theory being two gay men raise a baby boy and that baby grows into a gay man. You and I appear agreed it doesn't work that way. Odds are, about 98%, that the boy will be straight since sexual preference is innate....What is perhaps even more ridiculous is that fact that -despite everything that has been presented here so far ( which you probably have not read because you are not really interested in learning anything) you continue to frame the question in terms of "genetic vs. choice" when the scientific community is focused on "nature (biology) vs nurture ( environment) and is not even considering "choice" in any serious way...
Having a real life keeps me from reading all 75 pages to catch up. But this is CLOSE to all the proof need that homosexually is LARGELY choice.
Has anyone mentioned the very large BISEXUAL community? Or the PolyAmory contingents? Active bisexuals are all the proof I require that this IS largely a choice issue.. Bisexuals choose at whim. Many seem to be happier as Bi than the LesGay community as a whole.. And they often resolve happily for long time periods -- being one or the another with the right mate..
Again, you're conflating the difference between preference and behavior.Do you have control over your sexual desires? Again, I'm talking about preference, not behavior.In my humble opinion, the only way you can claim homosexuality is genetic and not a choice is to say that homosexuality is unlike any other sexual proclivity and those who are homosexual have no control over their sexual desires. I don't believe that is true.
Most married men look at other women (preference), but most do not pursue that attraction (behavior). Any married man who claims he's never looked at another woman is probably gay, neutered or lying.
Of course I have control over my sexual desires... what do you think the term "committed relationship" means? If I happen to see a good-looking woman jogging through the park, I don't pull her into the bushes and mount her like a fucking wild animal... I constrain my urges.
Apparently, homosexuals are the only segment of our species who can't control themselves. They simply crave cock up the ass and can't help it....they're born like that! We should all just accept they are born with this malady and there's nothing they can do about it. The rest of us have to subdue our primal urges and not act upon them. At least, that's how it seems to be.
How far removed is society from passing some kind of law that homosexuals can just flop down anywhere in public and have homosexual relations? Hey... they can't help it... they're born that way... you know, homosexual! Who are you to deny them their happiness? Homophobic bigot!
I'm not talking about "sexual urges" I'm talking about sexual and romantic attractions.
You're saying that homosexuals are less able to "control sexual urges' ? I have to wonder how you know that, and for that matter, how you know that necrophiles and zoophiles CAN control their urges.
Necrophilia and zoophilia are mental illness as is pedophilia. They are not about same gender attraction. Those references are just a nonsensical red herring
Well because that is the way homosexuality is presented. They can't help it, they are "born" that way! We are expected to accept the homosexual has no control whatsoever over his/her sexual desires... unlike a myriad of other sexual proclivities. Every other kind of "pervert" can restrain themselves and not act on their sexual impulses but a homosexual simply doesn't have that choice.
Necrophilia and zoophilia are the exact same "sexual attraction" as homosexuality. It is what someone is sexually attracted to and they can't do a thing about.... it's what cranks their tractors. It's just that we've accepted that taboo as "normalized" in society and it has become accepted that, somehow, they have no control over it whatsoever... they have to fuck the same gender... can't help themselves.... just how they are. We don't accept that behavior with pedophiles or any other deviancy, only homosexuality.
Well because that is the way homosexuality is presented. .
They can't help it, they are "born" that way! We are expected to accept the homosexual has no control whatsoever over his/her sexual desires... unlike a myriad of other sexual proclivities. Every other kind of "pervert" can restrain themselves and not act on their sexual impulses but a homosexual simply doesn't have that choice. .
Necrophilia and zoophilia are the exact same "sexual attraction" as homosexuality. It is what someone is sexually attracted to and they can't do a thing about.... it's what cranks their tractors. It's just that we've accepted that taboo as "normalized" in society and it has become accepted that, somehow, they have no control over it whatsoever... they have to fuck the same gender... can't help themselves.... just how they are. We don't accept that behavior with pedophiles or any other deviancy, only homosexuality.
Again, you're conflating the difference between preference and behavior.Do you have control over your sexual desires? Again, I'm talking about preference, not behavior.In my humble opinion, the only way you can claim homosexuality is genetic and not a choice is to say that homosexuality is unlike any other sexual proclivity and those who are homosexual have no control over their sexual desires. I don't believe that is true.
Most married men look at other women (preference), but most do not pursue that attraction (behavior). Any married man who claims he's never looked at another woman is probably gay, neutered or lying.
Of course I have control over my sexual desires... what do you think the term "committed relationship" means? If I happen to see a good-looking woman jogging through the park, I don't pull her into the bushes and mount her like a fucking wild animal... I constrain my urges.
Apparently, homosexuals are the only segment of our species who can't control themselves. They simply crave cock up the ass and can't help it....they're born like that! We should all just accept they are born with this malady and there's nothing they can do about it. The rest of us have to subdue our primal urges and not act upon them. At least, that's how it seems to be.
How far removed is society from passing some kind of law that homosexuals can just flop down anywhere in public and have homosexual relations? Hey... they can't help it... they're born that way... you know, homosexual! Who are you to deny them their happiness? Homophobic bigot!
It's one thing to prefer one particular gender over another. It's another to dress up like a circus clown.
Log Cabin Republicans | Leadership
“Necrophilia and zoophilia are the exact same "sexual attraction" as homosexuality?” That is just fucking ridiculous! OK, let’s say there is a similarity in terms of it reflecting who or what they are attracted to. So what? First of all, it does not prove that homosexuality is not genetic, which, again is what this is about. Hey, maybe these other things are also genetic, but again so what? Genetics does not determine what is “good” and bad” You might have a genetic predisposition for being a musician, or a genetic predisposition for being a schizophrenic, but does the presence of a genetic factor make them equal in terms of acceptability and desirability?
Your thinking on this is seriously flawed and fuzzy. In addition, is it possible that you do not understand that a function of the established social order is, in fact to determine what behavior is acceptable and what is not? Yes, we do, now, accept homosexuality as normal because we, collectively, have evolved to the point where we understand that love, affection and sex between consenting adults is not harmful and that a commitment to human rights requires us to stop persecuting gays for that. If you have a problem with that, and apparently you do, it is…. well…your problem. Deal with it.
On the other hand, you have not evolved sufficiently to understand that the desecration of human bodies or the abuse of animals and children is not the same thing as homosexuality. Not the same thing as love and affection between consenting, living adults. I honestly don’t know whether or not you actually believe your own bizarre horseshit or if you’re just having fun trolling. I find it hard to believe that anyone can be so depraved and stupid as to think that the prohibition of these other “philias “ are determined by political and popular cultural and not because common fucking sense would tell any thinking and intelligent person that they are reprehensible and harmful to individuals and to society.
Having said that, lets once again try to get you back on topic, which is the question of whether homosexuality is genetic or a choice. You might want to start by explaining what you think that “choice” is in that context. You might also want to discuss why it matters in terms of public policy and the law regarding gay people. Let’s see if you can dispense with the bullshit and deal with those questions in an honest and straight forward way. I doubt that you can or even have an interest in trying.
We accept homosexuality because there's nothing wrong with it.I'm not talking about "sexual urges" I'm talking about sexual and romantic attractions.
You're saying that homosexuals are less able to "control sexual urges' ? I have to wonder how you know that, and for that matter, how you know that necrophiles and zoophiles CAN control their urges.
Necrophilia and zoophilia are mental illness as is pedophilia. They are not about same gender attraction. Those references are just a nonsensical red herring
Well because that is the way homosexuality is presented. They can't help it, they are "born" that way! We are expected to accept the homosexual has no control whatsoever over his/her sexual desires... unlike a myriad of other sexual proclivities. Every other kind of "pervert" can restrain themselves and not act on their sexual impulses but a homosexual simply doesn't have that choice.
Necrophilia and zoophilia are the exact same "sexual attraction" as homosexuality. It is what someone is sexually attracted to and they can't do a thing about.... it's what cranks their tractors. It's just that we've accepted that taboo as "normalized" in society and it has become accepted that, somehow, they have no control over it whatsoever... they have to fuck the same gender... can't help themselves.... just how they are. We don't accept that behavior with pedophiles or any other deviancy, only homosexuality.
Disagreed. We accept homosexuality because what two consenting adults do with each other is nobody's business.We accept homosexuality because there's nothing wrong with it.
Bullshit! If two consenting adults do something illegal/wrong together we don't accept it.Disagreed. We accept homosexuality because what two consenting adults do with each other is nobody's business.We accept homosexuality because there's nothing wrong with it.
I'm not talking about "sexual urges" I'm talking about sexual and romantic attractions.
You're saying that homosexuals are less able to "control sexual urges' ? I have to wonder how you know that, and for that matter, how you know that necrophiles and zoophiles CAN control their urges.
Necrophilia and zoophilia are mental illness as is pedophilia. They are not about same gender attraction. Those references are just a nonsensical red herring
Well because that is the way homosexuality is presented. They can't help it, they are "born" that way! We are expected to accept the homosexual has no control whatsoever over his/her sexual desires... unlike a myriad of other sexual proclivities. Every other kind of "pervert" can restrain themselves and not act on their sexual impulses but a homosexual simply doesn't have that choice.
Necrophilia and zoophilia are the exact same "sexual attraction" as homosexuality. It is what someone is sexually attracted to and they can't do a thing about.... it's what cranks their tractors. It's just that we've accepted that taboo as "normalized" in society and it has become accepted that, somehow, they have no control over it whatsoever... they have to fuck the same gender... can't help themselves.... just how they are. We don't accept that behavior with pedophiles or any other deviancy, only homosexuality.
We accept homosexuality because there's nothing wrong with it.
“Necrophilia and zoophilia are the exact same "sexual attraction" as homosexuality?” That is just fucking ridiculous! OK, let’s say there is a similarity in terms of it reflecting who or what they are attracted to. So what? First of all, it does not prove that homosexuality is not genetic, which, again is what this is about. Hey, maybe these other things are also genetic, but again so what? Genetics does not determine what is “good” and bad” You might have a genetic predisposition for being a musician, or a genetic predisposition for being a schizophrenic, but does the presence of a genetic factor make them equal in terms of acceptability and desirability?
It's not a similarity, it's the same thing... a sexual attraction to _________. .
Progressive Patriot: OK You can keep blathering about how being attracted to persons of your own gender and having relations with a consenting adult is the same as fucking a corps, a child or an animal. No one is listening to that crap
Let's be clear, my clinical argument from the first post I made in this thread, has been that it's a genetic predisposition of which any number of sexual proclivities come from. I believe that every person is born with a mixture of hetero and homo sexual genes and in both sexes, the balance sometimes deviates into the 'other' side or toward homosexuality. It is less likely and thus is produced a minority.... a deviation. .
Progressive Patriot:
What??!! Where did you ever say that it was genetic before?? Now there are hetero and homo genes in everyone.? When did you make that startling discovery Doc?? I'm quite sure that you just made that up. You need to document the "science" that you claim knowledge of.
Your thinking on this is seriously flawed and fuzzy. In addition, is it possible that you do not understand that a function of the established social order is, in fact to determine what behavior is acceptable and what is not? Yes, we do, now, accept homosexuality as normal because we, collectively, have evolved to the point where we understand that love, affection and sex between consenting adults is not harmful and that a commitment to human rights requires us to stop persecuting gays for that. If you have a problem with that, and apparently you do, it is…. well…your problem. Deal with it.
I understand all this fully and I accept that society has made homosexual behavior normal. I said this much in my last post. Society has accepted there are some people who are homosexual and they should be free to be happy and enjoy life as homosexuals. I don't really have a problem with that. But when the argument comes down to whether homosexuality is a choice or genetic, it is a choice. Granted, it is a choice based on a genetic predisposition... one that society has accepted as "okay" ...seal of approval from society... this sexual behavior is no longer taboo. .
Progressive Patriot:
Gee really? You understand? Do you support marriage equality, freedom from discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodation?
We have been all through this “choice issue” I and other have tried to school you about why it makes no sense to conflate ‘choice” as it relates to sexual orientation vs. the choice of engaging in particular sexual behavior. Yet you will not even acknowledge what has been said about it, have not read the article that I posted about epigenetics, and continue to bandy the word around without explaining what you mean by it. I am going to try it one more time and then we are done here because I have better things to do than to try to teach someone who does not want to learn.
Again, what exactly do you mean by “choice” now? Do you mean that people choose to be hetero/ bi / or homosexual?? If that’s the case, you view has been largely debunked and neither you or anyone else here who pushes the “homosexual orientation as a choice” has been able to site a sing shred of actual evidence to support it.
If on the other hand you’re saying that some people choose a lifestyle for various reason, there is no argument there. Bi sexual people may in fact chose to live exclusively as gay or straight for periods of time. Gay people may pretend to be – and give the appearance of being straight in order to escape discrimination and social condemnation, although I’m sure there is a lot less of that now. So what exactly are you talking about. The more you bloviate about this stuff, the more confused I become about what you really believe. I just don’t know if you’re knowingly playing some bizarre game or if you are really that confused yourself. Pretty sure it’s not me
On the other hand, you have not evolved sufficiently to understand that the desecration of human bodies or the abuse of animals and children is not the same thing as homosexuality. Not the same thing as love and affection between consenting, living adults. I honestly don’t know whether or not you actually believe your own bizarre horseshit or if you’re just having fun trolling. I find it hard to believe that anyone can be so depraved and stupid as to think that the prohibition of these other “philias “ are determined by political and popular cultural and not because common fucking sense would tell any thinking and intelligent person that they are reprehensible and harmful to individuals and to society.
Hmmmmm.....
desecration
verb (used with object), desecrated,desecrating.
1. to divest of sacred or hallowed character or office.
2. to divert from a sacred to a profane use or purpose.
3. to treat with sacrilege; profane.
Sounds like you've got a religious problem with the kind of "love" people like to make?
Necrophobe!... Bigot! ....Racist! ....Bible-Thumper! .
D
Progressive Patriot:
Desecration in this context is a legal term. Desecration of Human Remains. Go dig up a corps and fuck it and see what you’re charged with. Sounds like your problems go deeper than religion.
Having said that, lets once again try to get you back on topic, which is the question of whether homosexuality is genetic or a choice. You might want to start by explaining what you think that “choice” is in that context. You might also want to discuss why it matters in terms of public policy and the law regarding gay people. Let’s see if you can dispense with the bullshit and deal with those questions in an honest and straight forward way. I doubt that you can or even have an interest in trying.
You're trying to bait me into an argument we're not having now. I've already said, society accepts homosexuality. The question is about whether it is genetic or choice. Clinically, you can say it is both, but that means it IS both. We can't pretend it's NOT both. It's a genetic predisposition the same as necrophilia, pedophilia, zoophilia, etc. It can also be influenced by life experiences and perhaps even trauma or abuses. Still... the decision to engage in homosexual behavior is a choice. Whether homosexual-genetically-inclined or not. .
Progressive Patriot:
What ? !!we’re not having an argument about whether homosexuality is genetic or a choice? Seriously ? Never mind, this is just more of the same inane blathering that you’re so good at. And now your also and expert on the causes of necrophilia, pedophilia, zoophilia, etc ?? Give me a break. I’m not even going there. It’s just another appeal to ignorance.
Similarly, you can also argue that heterosexual intercourse between "straight" partners is also a choice to act on sexual desire. I'm not trying to seem "discriminatory" here... just discussing this like a rational adult. You want to turn this into some kind of dramatic confrontation and I am not interested in that. .
As we have studied human DNA, we are finding out some remarkable things. Our DNA is actually influenced by events of significance and trauma in our lives. We pass on our baggage, in other words. It becomes written into our DNA code and we pass it on. But, I digress.
You should say your posts to your face in the mirror before you post them. Maybe if you hear and see yourself, you'll realize when you are stupid and when you are smart.Bullshit! If two consenting adults do something illegal/wrong together we don't accept it.
You think homosexuality is wrong so you haven't accepted it. It's that bible you read that has you confused
Disagreed. We accept homosexuality because what two consenting adults do with each other is nobody's business.We accept homosexuality because there's nothing wrong with it.
What are you jabbering about? It's apparent that you are terribly confused about the difference between lifestyle choices and sexual orientation. Yes, those who are bisexual can and do, at various points in there life, chose to live as and have relationships which people of the same or opposite gender. They are still bisexual- as fixed sexual orientation as is homosexual and heterosexual. That does not mean that sexual orientation is a choice.A small correction: "choice" would come under nurture/environment. The homophobic theory being two gay men raise a baby boy and that baby grows into a gay man. You and I appear agreed it doesn't work that way. Odds are, about 98%, that the boy will be straight since sexual preference is innate....What is perhaps even more ridiculous is that fact that -despite everything that has been presented here so far ( which you probably have not read because you are not really interested in learning anything) you continue to frame the question in terms of "genetic vs. choice" when the scientific community is focused on "nature (biology) vs nurture ( environment) and is not even considering "choice" in any serious way...
Having a real life keeps me from reading all 75 pages to catch up. But this is CLOSE to all the proof need that homosexually is LARGELY choice.
Has anyone mentioned the very large BISEXUAL community? Or the PolyAmory contingents? Active bisexuals are all the proof I require that this IS largely a choice issue.. Bisexuals choose at whim. Many seem to be happier as Bi than the LesGay community as a whole.. And they often resolve happily for long time periods -- being one or the another with the right mate..
And you are throwing polyamory into the mix? Why? That is completely irrelevant and serves no purpose other than to obfuscate the issue
What are you jabbering about? It's apparent that you are terribly confused about the difference between lifestyle choices and sexual orientation. Yes, those who are bisexual can and do, at various points in there life, chose to live as and have relationships which people of the same or opposite gender. They are still bisexual- as fixed sexual orientation as is homosexual and heterosexual. That does not mean that sexual orientation is a choice.A small correction: "choice" would come under nurture/environment. The homophobic theory being two gay men raise a baby boy and that baby grows into a gay man. You and I appear agreed it doesn't work that way. Odds are, about 98%, that the boy will be straight since sexual preference is innate....What is perhaps even more ridiculous is that fact that -despite everything that has been presented here so far ( which you probably have not read because you are not really interested in learning anything) you continue to frame the question in terms of "genetic vs. choice" when the scientific community is focused on "nature (biology) vs nurture ( environment) and is not even considering "choice" in any serious way...
Having a real life keeps me from reading all 75 pages to catch up. But this is CLOSE to all the proof need that homosexually is LARGELY choice.
Has anyone mentioned the very large BISEXUAL community? Or the PolyAmory contingents? Active bisexuals are all the proof I require that this IS largely a choice issue.. Bisexuals choose at whim. Many seem to be happier as Bi than the LesGay community as a whole.. And they often resolve happily for long time periods -- being one or the another with the right mate..
And you are throwing polyamory into the mix? Why? That is completely irrelevant and serves no purpose other than to obfuscate the issue
Oh hell no.. That's your confusion between the terms lifestyle choice and sexual orientation. The question of the thread is sexual orientation a "lifestyle choice" or is biologically ascribed. A women or man CHOOSING to be either hetero or gay AT WILL is a choice. If it's a women they will be full bore gay lesbian for a while when it PLEASES them. Same with men. Full out GAY for a month or 10 years. With maybe a few swings back to hetero. They are a LARGE part of the LGBT community. Their sexual orientation is whatever MATE(s) pleases them at the time.
I doubt you could tell the diff between a loving long term BI relationship and a gay one.
And the polyamory people take it a step further and commit to multi-couple "sexual orientation". Many insist on having "marriage ceremonies" to show their commitment. SOME of these are more spouse swapping, but a large fraction have loving relations with any portion or any one. You really have to "love a guy" and commit to them to BE polyamorous..
You're just hung up on a special case where these commitments are EXCLUSIVE -- one way or the other. And that exclusivity doesn't change the commitment, love or passion that's involved. Bi people have the same prescription for finding a mate.. Also often based on having a "male dominant" or "female submissive" type of roles.
If it's "just an act" -- it's pretty much indistinguishable from pedigreed gay...
Who are you talking to and what are you trying to say. Go lay down and come back when the crack high wears off. 
It appears that I dropped my quote:What are you jabbering about? It's apparent that you are terribly confused about the difference between lifestyle choices and sexual orientation. Yes, those who are bisexual can and do, at various points in there life, chose to live as and have relationships which people of the same or opposite gender. They are still bisexual- as fixed sexual orientation as is homosexual and heterosexual. That does not mean that sexual orientation is a choice.A small correction: "choice" would come under nurture/environment. The homophobic theory being two gay men raise a baby boy and that baby grows into a gay man. You and I appear agreed it doesn't work that way. Odds are, about 98%, that the boy will be straight since sexual preference is innate....What is perhaps even more ridiculous is that fact that -despite everything that has been presented here so far ( which you probably have not read because you are not really interested in learning anything) you continue to frame the question in terms of "genetic vs. choice" when the scientific community is focused on "nature (biology) vs nurture ( environment) and is not even considering "choice" in any serious way...
Having a real life keeps me from reading all 75 pages to catch up. But this is CLOSE to all the proof need that homosexually is LARGELY choice.
Has anyone mentioned the very large BISEXUAL community? Or the PolyAmory contingents? Active bisexuals are all the proof I require that this IS largely a choice issue.. Bisexuals choose at whim. Many seem to be happier as Bi than the LesGay community as a whole.. And they often resolve happily for long time periods -- being one or the another with the right mate..
And you are throwing polyamory into the mix? Why? That is completely irrelevant and serves no purpose other than to obfuscate the issue
Oh hell no.. That's your confusion between the terms lifestyle choice and sexual orientation. The question of the thread is sexual orientation a "lifestyle choice" or is biologically ascribed. A women or man CHOOSING to be either hetero or gay AT WILL is a choice. If it's a women they will be full bore gay lesbian for a while when it PLEASES them. Same with men. Full out GAY for a month or 10 years. With maybe a few swings back to hetero. They are a LARGE part of the LGBT community. Their sexual orientation is whatever MATE(s) pleases them at the time.
I doubt you could tell the diff between a loving long term BI relationship and a gay one.
And the polyamory people take it a step further and commit to multi-couple "sexual orientation". Many insist on having "marriage ceremonies" to show their commitment. SOME of these are more spouse swapping, but a large fraction have loving relations with any portion or any one. You really have to "love a guy" and commit to them to BE polyamorous..
You're just hung up on a special case where these commitments are EXCLUSIVE -- one way or the other. And that exclusivity doesn't change the commitment, love or passion that's involved. Bi people have the same prescription for finding a mate.. Also often based on having a "male dominant" or "female submissive" type of roles.
If it's "just an act" -- it's pretty much indistinguishable from pedigreed gay...
Who are you talking to and what are you trying to say. Go lay down and come back when the crack high wears off.
What are you jabbering about? It's apparent that you are terribly confused about the difference between lifestyle choices and sexual orientation. Yes, those who are bisexual can and do, at various points in there life, chose to live as and have relationships which people of the same or opposite gender. They are still bisexual- as fixed sexual orientation as is homosexual and heterosexual. That does not mean that sexual orientation is a choice.A small correction: "choice" would come under nurture/environment. The homophobic theory being two gay men raise a baby boy and that baby grows into a gay man. You and I appear agreed it doesn't work that way. Odds are, about 98%, that the boy will be straight since sexual preference is innate....What is perhaps even more ridiculous is that fact that -despite everything that has been presented here so far ( which you probably have not read because you are not really interested in learning anything) you continue to frame the question in terms of "genetic vs. choice" when the scientific community is focused on "nature (biology) vs nurture ( environment) and is not even considering "choice" in any serious way...
Having a real life keeps me from reading all 75 pages to catch up. But this is CLOSE to all the proof need that homosexually is LARGELY choice.
Has anyone mentioned the very large BISEXUAL community? Or the PolyAmory contingents? Active bisexuals are all the proof I require that this IS largely a choice issue.. Bisexuals choose at whim. Many seem to be happier as Bi than the LesGay community as a whole.. And they often resolve happily for long time periods -- being one or the another with the right mate..
And you are throwing polyamory into the mix? Why? That is completely irrelevant and serves no purpose other than to obfuscate the issue
Oh hell no.. That's your confusion between the terms lifestyle choice and sexual orientation. The question of the thread is sexual orientation a "lifestyle choice" or is biologically ascribed. A BI-sexual women or man CHOOSING to be either hetero or gay AT WILL is a choice. If it's a women they will be full bore gay lesbian for a while when it PLEASES them. Same with men. Full out GAY for a month or 10 years. With maybe a few swings back to hetero. They are a LARGE part of the LGBT community. Their sexual orientation is whatever MATE(s) pleases them at the time.
I doubt you could tell the diff between a loving long term BI relationship and a gay one.
And the polyamory people take it a step further and commit to multi-couple "sexual orientation". Many insist on having "marriage ceremonies" to show their commitment. SOME of these are more spouse swapping, but a large fraction have loving relations with any portion or any one. You really have to "love a guy" and commit to them to BE polyamorous..
You're just hung up on a special case where these commitments are EXCLUSIVE -- one way or the other. And that exclusivity doesn't change the commitment, love or passion that's involved. Bi people have the same prescription for finding a mate.. Also often based on having a "male dominant" or "female submissive" type of roles.
If it's "just an act" -- it's pretty much indistinguishable from pedigreed gay...
What are you jabbering about? It's apparent that you are terribly confused about the difference between lifestyle choices and sexual orientation. Yes, those who are bisexual can and do, at various points in there life, chose to live as and have relationships which people of the same or opposite gender. They are still bisexual- as fixed sexual orientation as is homosexual and heterosexual. That does not mean that sexual orientation is a choice.A small correction: "choice" would come under nurture/environment. The homophobic theory being two gay men raise a baby boy and that baby grows into a gay man. You and I appear agreed it doesn't work that way. Odds are, about 98%, that the boy will be straight since sexual preference is innate.
Having a real life keeps me from reading all 75 pages to catch up. But this is CLOSE to all the proof need that homosexually is LARGELY choice.
Has anyone mentioned the very large BISEXUAL community? Or the PolyAmory contingents? Active bisexuals are all the proof I require that this IS largely a choice issue.. Bisexuals choose at whim. Many seem to be happier as Bi than the LesGay community as a whole.. And they often resolve happily for long time periods -- being one or the another with the right mate..
And you are throwing polyamory into the mix? Why? That is completely irrelevant and serves no purpose other than to obfuscate the issue
Oh hell no.. That's your confusion between the terms lifestyle choice and sexual orientation. The question of the thread is sexual orientation a "lifestyle choice" or is biologically ascribed. A BI-sexual women or man CHOOSING to be either hetero or gay AT WILL is a choice. If it's a women they will be full bore gay lesbian for a while when it PLEASES them. Same with men. Full out GAY for a month or 10 years. With maybe a few swings back to hetero. They are a LARGE part of the LGBT community. Their sexual orientation is whatever MATE(s) pleases them at the time.
I doubt you could tell the diff between a loving long term BI relationship and a gay one.
And the polyamory people take it a step further and commit to multi-couple "sexual orientation". Many insist on having "marriage ceremonies" to show their commitment. SOME of these are more spouse swapping, but a large fraction have loving relations with any portion or any one. You really have to "love a guy" and commit to them to BE polyamorous..
You're just hung up on a special case where these commitments are EXCLUSIVE -- one way or the other. And that exclusivity doesn't change the commitment, love or passion that's involved. Bi people have the same prescription for finding a mate.. Also often based on having a "male dominant" or "female submissive" type of roles.
If it's "just an act" -- it's pretty much indistinguishable from pedigreed gay...
Bisexuals in committed "gay" relationships are INDISTIGUISHABLE from pedigreed gays or lesbians. Except they exercise each relationship maneuver by CHOICE. And can swing from hetero to "gay" at will. Kinda hard to find a "biological marker" for the ability to CHOOSE something? Isn't it?
