Cause of Homosexuality and Bisexuality

[Midlonia]

I don't think I've ever heard "Abnormal" ever used in anything but a negative way. It's hard to really see it used in a positive or neutral way.

Personally I don't know what the triggers could be for sexuality. There could be a combination of genetics and nurture, there is obvious a huge social segment to it that programs in the concept that deviation from a heterosexual relationship is wrong or there "has" to be some underlying cause behind it.

The latter comes from human need to quantify everything and the former seems to have origins in religious practices which may have been based on a need to boost numbers for that particular religious sect by all means necessary which means basically not wasting any potential genetic material. (See Mormonism's polygamy for example, which was aimed primarily at boosting congregational numbers) This in turn has a later knock on effect and demonizes such relationships instead of accepting them and leads to more... irrational positions on the matter or even odd threads where we must quantify nature at all costs.

[Der Teutoniker]

I don't think I've ever heard "Abnormal" ever used in anything but a negative way. It's hard to really see it used in a positive or neutral way.

Most of the time, it's used negatively.

That does not mean that the word is intrinsically, or necessarily negative. I have no problem with a misunderstanding due to my linguistic choices, and I certainly wouldn't blame anyone for questioning my intentions with using the term "aberrant".

I have a harder time not blaming people for repeatedly failing to see how diction differs from connotation, despite numerous explanations. The word is not necessarily negative. You see it as negative? That's great - demonstrably, it is not necessarily negative. I did not use it in a negative way - and I explained that several times. Popular or common usage does not alone determine what a word means.

[Meryuma]

evil forces/powers cause homosexuality. You can not be a homosexual if you want to go to heaven according to Jesus Christ. Think about it...


Feel free to telegram with questions/ comments/ etc

For one thing, you don't know which Bible passages are attributed to Jesus and which aren't.

For another thing, why is homosexuality evil? Why would God condemn it/why would evil forces want it spread?

[Midlonia]

I don't think I've ever heard "Abnormal" ever used in anything but a negative way. It's hard to really see it used in a positive or neutral way.

Most of the time, it's used negatively.

That does not mean that the word is intrinsically, or necessarily negative. I have no problem with a misunderstanding due to my linguistic choices, and I certainly wouldn't blame anyone for questioning my intentions with using the term "aberrant".

I have a harder time not blaming people for repeatedly failing to see how diction differs from connotation, despite numerous explanations. The word is not necessarily negative. You see it as negative? That's great - demonstrably, it is not necessarily negative. I did not use it in a negative way - and I explained that several times. Popular or common usage does not alone determine what a word means.

Actually you'd find it does, "Gay" 50-60 years ago was widely considered to mean "happy" that useage has fallen utterly out of use to the point it is either used as an insult, or to represent a male homosexual. You can try and play with the definition but common useage of the word will result in people calling you out on it. Doesn't matter what the original definition was, nobody uses the original terminology.

[Der Teutoniker]

Actually you'd find it does, "Gay" 50-60 years ago was widely considered to mean "happy" that useage has fallen utterly out of use to the point it is either used as an insult, or to represent a male homosexual. You can try and play with the definition but common useage of the word will result in people calling you out on it. Doesn't matter what the original definition was, nobody uses the original terminology.

Edit (read first): To actually address the first part of your sentence - no, it does not. That doesn't make any sense. Diction is not necessarily determined by "common" usage, nor does such usage transfer universally, nor does such usage change the possible, or valid meanings of the word.

"Gay" in modern usage can mean a few different things actually. The two most often uses likely are as a generic expletive, and (usually male) homosexuality. One could certainly still use it to mean "happy". It would seem a bit antiquated, but it's still perfectly valid. Not nobody uses it to mean happy - remember that only Sith deal in absolutes.

In either case, we aren't talking about the connotation of the word "gay". We're talking about the connotation (verses diction) of the word "aberrant". I understand how someone could confuse my intent on using the word (something I've admitted three times now I think) but I used it in a way that is completely valid for my intention, and meaning (which is neutral) despite that some people try to define "abnormal" exclusively as a negative term. It isn't exclusively negative - despite your personal experience. That's a fact you need to deal with.

Edit II: Words are fascinating when you know what they really mean.

[Orenica]

I still don't buy it, but if science does somehow discover the gene...

Definitive article?

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2 ... ct-iq.html
Read this, focussing on 'But the effect – although measurable – is small: the gene alters IQ by just 1.29 points.', 'studies have consistently failed to find any single genes that have a substantial impact. Instead, researchers typically find that hundreds of genes contribute.' and 'According to some researchers, that essentially proves that intelligence relies on the action of a multitude of genes after all.'
Now it's not connected to the topic, but it's relevant to your scientific understanding. It is rare for a single gene to affect only one area of the anatomy, and rare for a condition to be caused by a single gene, acting on it's own.

[Salandriagado]

No, because teaching you enough for you to understand it would leave no time to teach you anything else.

Well then what's the point?

Teaching you things that are useful, and serve as a decent starting point for universities to teach you it properly. By way of analogy, I assume you've learned at least some differentiation? But you certainly don't know what a differential actually is. In fact, you probably don't know what a function is, in the first place.

Changes during puberty.
Prior to puberty, you are asexual.
I take the theory that environmental factors that probably differ person to person determine which blueprint your brain uses for it's "construction" during puberty stages.

What determines asexuality, then?

Does my body just say, "FUCK CHANGES WE'RE STAYING THE COURSE"?

Pretty much how it went for me.

The real question is "why does the cause of homosexuality matter?" - and I believe that the answer to that is that the USA's laws on discrimination mean you can't discriminate against "protected classes" - and for sexuality to count as one it'd have to be innate. Hence why bigots are all "homosexuality is a choice!". I could be wrong, of course - my knowledge of US law isn't exactly encyclopedic.

If homosexuality is genetic then people who seek homosexual relationships will have something to combat the Bible.... why they would want to do this I'll never know.

Because the bible is a fucking terrible set of guidelines?

Because wondering why we feel the need to explain the cause of something that we've already confirmed is natural, healthy, and harmless is "not contributing."

Define Natural.

Natural: arising naturally, arising from nature, present in nature, in this case, a product of evolution.

It occurs in literally every species on the planet, it does not occur due to external or man-made enivronmental or physical changes... I take it you're one of those bigots who feels that homosexuality is not natural?

I wouldn't make assumptions of the first question someone asks you.


Less typing for me.

It isn't an appeal to nature, it's the standard way of defeating an appeal to nature of this kind - by pointing out that it is natural anyway.

Did he not? My mistake then. I wonder how it was brought up.

Someone said: "Animals commit homosexual acts" therefore: "Humans should commit homosexual acts"

No, he said "animals commit homosexual acts, therefore you cannot claim that it is 'unnatural' in order to claim that it is somehow bad".

Naturally born heterosexual, since it's normal.

Again, Define: Normal.

Perpendicular. I don't know about you, but I've seen plenty of homosexuals perpendicular to the ground.

evil forces/powers cause homosexuality. You can not be a homosexual if you want to go to heaven according to Jesus Christ. Think about it...


Feel free to telegram with questions/ comments/ etc

Well, that's easy. Nobody's going anyway, so we may as well enjoy ourselves whilst we're here.

Claiming to be asexual because "sex is overrated" just means you're a heterosexual (or possibly homosexual) hipster. Were you asexual, the very idea of sex would repulse you.

I daresay a real asexual wouldn't even be participating in a discussion of sexuality.

We do occasionally get dragged in (mostly by people borderline-flaming us), but generally true.

I guess we can just call AVEN and OH WAIT!!!!

http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/1759 ... iouslylol/

AVEN shouldn't exist as you can choose not to be asexual. You therefore don't need any visibility or support. After all, there's no such thing as a sexual minority if you can choose to change your sexual orientation at will.

No, I cannot "choose" to not be asexual.

That doesn't even make sense. Your posts are getting strangely incoherent now.

Asexuals aren't repulsed by sex, this is a preconceived notion you've made up. Its just there.

Yes, we are.

From my observations, sexual orientation is a choice. This decision can be influenced by external factors. I do not think sexual orientation has anything to do with genetics.

No, from your completely incorrect bullshit that you pulled out of your arse, it's a choice. Back in the real world, it isn't. You can check this very easily: Take your current sexuality, and reverse it. If you're heterosexual, go homosexual, if bisexual, go asexual, and the converses. Not just "force yourself to have sex with somebody you don't want to", but actually make yourself enjoy it to the exclusion of your current preferences. Go on then.

Oh wait, you can't.

The idea that homosexuality is alright has been hammered into peoples' heads so much that they trick themselves into thinking they are homosexual. I'm not trying to troll. I'm trying to juggle a debate with psychology work and learning Dutch.

You just failed psychology forever by claiming that genetics doesn't affect feelings. Focus on the Dutch.

[Eirenia]

What? I'd be interested in a source for that.

I'm sorry, I don't possess a direct source. I don't keep every url I've ever visited, don't remember every video and program I've ever watched or books and articles I've ever read.

That would be because you're wrong.

[The New World Oceania]

Thirty pages, but a better question has still yet to be asked.

What makes people heterosexual?

[Veceria]

Thirty pages, but a better question has still yet to be asked.

What makes people heterosexual?

Jesus. *coughcoughcough*

[Mavorpen]

Thirty pages, but a better question has still yet to be asked.

What makes people heterosexual?

Why is that a better question?

[Olthar]

Thirty pages, but a better question has still yet to be asked.

What makes people heterosexual?

The biological need to procreate. :|

[Herrebrugh]

Thirty pages, but a better question has still yet to be asked.

What makes people heterosexual?

See those thirty pages for the answer, pretty much.

[Salandriagado]

Thirty pages, but a better question has still yet to be asked.

What makes people heterosexual?

The biological need to procreate. :|

As demonstrated by the fact that large proportions of the population don't procreate, that be bullshit.

[Norstal]

Thirty pages, but a better question has still yet to be asked.

What makes people heterosexual?

Jesus. *coughcoughcough*

I don't know, Jesus would make people homosexual. Look at those abs. Just...look at it.

[Jagalonia]

Of course it's the gay gene. What else could it possibly be?

[Olthar]

The biological need to procreate. :|

As demonstrated by the fact that large proportions of the population don't procreate, that be bullshit.

Oh, yes. Clearly, evolution possesses incredible powers of foresight and designed itself so that a couple billion years later, human societies would advance far enough that reproduction was no longer a priority and created sexuality based around that future.

[Jagalonia]

The biological need to procreate. :|

As demonstrated by the fact that large proportions of the population don't procreate, that be bullshit.

There are also large proportions of the population that shouldn't procreate.....

[Salandriagado]

As demonstrated by the fact that large proportions of the population don't procreate, that be bullshit.

Oh, yes. Clearly, evolution possesses incredible powers of foresight and designed itself so that a couple billion years later, human societies would advance far enough that reproduction was no longer a priority and created sexuality based around that future.

The fact that people choose to procreate implies that it is not a biological need. It is a powerful drive in many, true, but there are also evolutionary advantages to having a percentage of the population be gay (or at least not interested in producing children).

[The united imperial sector]

this is jusy my opinion but homosexuality is a mental illness i think theres a gay gene and it can be cured.

[Veceria]

Jesus. *coughcoughcough*

I don't know, Jesus would make people homosexual. Look at those abs. Just...look at it.

True.

[Eirenia]

this is jusy my opinion but homosexuality is a mental illness i think theres a gay gene and it can be cured.

And you think that because?

[Norstal]

this is jusy my opinion but homosexuality is a mental illness i think theres a gay gene and it can be cured.

Which gene would that be? I looked everywhere mang

[Ifreann]

Thirty pages, but a better question has still yet to be asked.

What makes people heterosexual?

The biological need to procreate. :|

Boobies. Boobies make people straight. Well, man people. They make woman people gay.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

this is jusy my opinion but homosexuality is a mental illness i think theres a gay gene and it can be cured.

Correct, it's your opinion.

It's also wrong.

What would make it an illness, what would make homosexuality something caused by one gene alone, and why would it need "curing"?