Study seeks DNA clues on homosexuality - AnabolicMinds.com

Study seeks DNA clues on homosexuality

Page 1 of 4 123 ... Last
  1. Advanced Member
    bombBoogie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Age
    32
    Posts
    649
    Rep Power
    418

    Reputation

    Study seeks DNA clues on homosexuality


    Study seeks DNA clues on homosexuality - Yahoo! News

    Does anyone believe that genetics plays a role on sexuality of straight,bi,lez,gey?

  2. Senior Member
    MashedPotato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,192
    Rep Power
    719

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by bombBoogie View Post
    Study seeks DNA clues on homosexuality - Yahoo! News

    Does anyone believe that genetics plays a role on sexuality of straight,bi,lez,gey?


    Certainly makes sense....
  3. Senior Member
    Dr Packenwood's Avatar
    Stats
    7'5"  600 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,257
    Rep Power
    716

    Reputation

    I think anything is possible. Hell, every aspect of our being is affected by genetics. How many gene codes are there something like 3 billion?

    http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresource...ome/home.shtml
    •   
       

  4. New Member
    xjsynx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    92
    Rep Power
    174

    Reputation

    I think it is BS, but what do I know?

    If it is true then it is a flawed gene, maybe a gene saying you should no pro-create???? Kind of goes hand in hand with Survival of the Fittest.

    There is nothing wrong with someone being gay, but it goes against Natural Law.
  5. New Member
    Polynomial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    363
    Rep Power
    270

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by xjsynx View Post
    I think it is BS, but what do I know?

    If it is true then it is a flawed gene, maybe a gene saying you should no pro-create???? Kind of goes hand in hand with Survival of the Fittest.

    There is nothing wrong with someone being gay, but it goes against Natural Law.
    Gay rights very much rely on the assumption that homosexuality is genetic. That is, you, society, and the individual have no (or at least not much) control over it.

    From an evolutionary point of view, homosexuality is very useful when the size of the population becomes large. It basically limits how fast the population grows.

    In any case, homosexuality is great because:
    1) Girl on girl
    2) Girl on girl
    3) Girl on girl
  6. Senior Member
    MashedPotato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,192
    Rep Power
    719

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Polynomial View Post

    In any case, homosexuality is great because:
    1) Girl on girl
    2) Girl on girl
    3) Girl on girl
    Wouldnt that increase the reproductive rates through indirect stimulization of the males?
  7. New Member
    Polynomial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    363
    Rep Power
    270

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by MashedPotato View Post
    Wouldnt that increase the reproductive rates through indirect stimulization of the males?
    I'm not sure, I'd have to run a lot of experiments to find out.
  8. Elite Member
    bioman's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    42
    Posts
    7,697
    Rep Power
    513131

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    "..but it goes against Natural Law."



    And what, pray tell, would that be?
  9. Elite Member
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307852

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by bioman View Post
    "..but it goes against Natural Law."



    And what, pray tell, would that be?
    Natural law states that only genes with a survival advantage get conveyed to the next generation of a species. Clearly a homosexual gene, if it exists in such simplistic form, would not be a dominant trait. There is no survival advantage, just the opposite. By virtue of it's character, there is no reproduction at all that takes place with homosexuals so the gene would limit it's own existence.

    I do agree however that two hot chicks on each other is reasonable natural We all come from breast feeding, boys and girls alike start at momma breast, so it stands to reason. Women are entitled to have a healthy lesbian curiosity.

    I tell you what is really doing it these days, all the estrogens in the environment and a latent social agenda to encourage it. Homosexuality has always been at the bottom of the curve to some self-limited degree, but genes will not explain the recent surge of this behavior.
  10. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27063

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    Natural law states that only genes with a survival advantage get conveyed to the next generation of a species. Clearly a homosexual gene, if it exists in such simplistic form, would not be a dominant trait. There is no survival advantage, just the opposite. By virtue of it's character, there is no reproduction at all that takes place with homosexuals so the gene would limit it's own existence.

    I do agree however that two hot chicks on each other is reasonable natural We all come from breast feeding, boys and girls alike start at momma breast, so it stands to reason. Women are entitled to have a healthy lesbian curiosity.

    I tell you what is really doing it these days, all the estrogens in the environment and a latent social agenda to encourage it. Homosexuality has always been at the bottom of the curve to some self-limited degree, but genes will not explain the recent surge of this behavior.
    You indict homosexual as if it is some negative pathology developed through a lack of moral regulation; you're like the homophobic Durkheim.

    Homosexuality, despite what a conservative imperative may wish you to perceive, has been around since humans stopped engaging in sexual activity strictly on a procreation precedent. "Natural Law", as it were, has little to do with the contemporary interplay of the complex set of social relations we have so deemed 'society'. Viewing a set of relations so nuanced and intricate as developed society in terms of 'natural laws' is, aptly put, I suppose, primitive and archaic.
  11. Senior Member
    MashedPotato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,192
    Rep Power
    719

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    You indict homosexual as if it is some negative pathology developed through a lack of moral regulation; you're like the homophobic Durkheim.

    Homosexuality, despite what a conservative imperative may wish you to perceive, has been around since humans stopped engaging in sexual activity strictly on a procreation precedent. "Natural Law", as it were, has little to do with the contemporary interplay of the complex set of social relations we have so deemed 'society'. Viewing a set of relations so nuanced and intricate as developed society in terms of 'natural laws' is, aptly put, I suppose, primitive and archaic.
    My friend you do have a point.

    Whether those of you out there like it or not, both males and females of every species (yes including humans) have some degree of "homosexual" tendancies. This does not mean that everyone is homosexual, or would kiss another of the opposite sex etc... but this does mean that to some degree every one of us has the ability to rank another of the same sex on attractivenes.

    If we did not have any of this homosexual gene or whatnot, we would be unable to determine whether another of the same sex is attractive or not. I.e you couldnt tell whether G. Bush was more or less attractive than some CK model ...

    Finally I would like to say that I do belive that homosexuality is linked to genes, or has a basic genetic starting point (as menioned above). I mean look at how we develop, we all start off as females, then depending on certain factors (i wont go into here as this isnt biology class) we either remain female or develop into male characteristics. Now would it, or would it not be possible that at some point, some gene is not properly converted into the correct "sex" and so still functions as if one was female (i.e male attracted to female).

    The same can be said for females, whereby the clitoris is infact....a small penis.

    There are many articles and studies on this, and yes Dr.D is correct enviroment certainly plays a role, but it CANNOT make you turn "homosexual" or homosexual to "straight" as has been proved....obviously.
  12. Elite Member
    bioman's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    42
    Posts
    7,697
    Rep Power
    513131

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    "Homosexuality has always been at the bottom of the curve to some self-limited degree, but genes will not explain the recent surge of this behavior."

    By most estimates, homosexuals have always comprised about 10-13% of the population..the Greeks wrote of it, the Romans, the Shogunate, ancient India et cetera.

    I highly doubt there is a surge in "this behavior", rather it's no longer an automatic death sentence for those who engage in it so you're more prone to see it.
  13. Senior Member
    MashedPotato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,192
    Rep Power
    719

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by bioman View Post
    "Homosexuality has always been at the bottom of the curve to some self-limited degree, but genes will not explain the recent surge of this behavior."

    By most estimates, homosexuals have always comprised about 10-13% of the population..the Greeks wrote of it, the Romans, the Shogunate, ancient India et cetera.

    I highly doubt there is a surge in "this behavior", rather it's no longer an automatic death sentence for those who engage in it so you're more prone to see it.
    Very True. Society is now more "allowing" of it. For example:

    Homosexual lover to the Roman emperor

    Hadrian Archeologists have discovered ruins of a temple near Rome that is dedicated to the youthful slave historians believe was a homosexual lover to the Roman emperor Hadrian.

    The temple to Antinous, noted for his beauty, athleticism and hunting ability, dates to 134 A.D., four years after he died at the age of 21.

    The temple was discovered during excavations on Hadrian's villa, about 20 miles east of Rome. Archeologists reportedly found planters and fountains for interior gardens and marble fragments with hieroglyphics.

    Scholars are uncertain whether Antinous committed suicide by jumping into the Nile river or was pushed by the emperor's jealous aides. The discovery of this temple may provide the answer, according to lead archeologist Zaccaria Mari.

    According to historians, Hadrian was so distraught over Antinous' death that he declared the former slave a god and named a city in Egypt -- Antinopolis -- after him.

    Hadrian (76-138 A.D.) is considered one of the greatest Roman emperors.

  14. New Member
    Polynomial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    363
    Rep Power
    270

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by bioman View Post
    "Homosexuality has always been at the bottom of the curve to some self-limited degree, but genes will not explain the recent surge of this behavior."

    By most estimates, homosexuals have always comprised about 10-13% of the population..the Greeks wrote of it, the Romans, the Shogunate, ancient India et cetera.

    I highly doubt there is a surge in "this behavior", rather it's no longer an automatic death sentence for those who engage in it so you're more prone to see it.
    Let's also not forget that back in the day a lot of gay men probably did not express their homosexuality but rather lived in solitude. What else would you do if your only choice was to marry the sex that you weren't attracted to?
  15. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27063

    Reputation

    Exactly. As I said, from the very onset of our transition from strictly nomadic and fragmented tribes to agrarian and simple commodity producing 'societies' [in quotations, as the earliest civilizations lacked infrastructural necessities to be deemed a society], we have progressively divorced our conduct from 'Natural Law'.

    Property ownership, inheritance, governmental structures, education, medicine, all by this 'Natural Law' definition, deviate from the inherent instinctual behaviour of humans. The point I am trying to illustrate, is our conduct is no longer dictated in a linear-causal relationship by 'Natural Law'. It has not been since the collective capacities of humanity was great enough to rise above naturally imposed barriers on a consistence basis; thereby rendering judging conduct based on 'natural' behaviour utterly de-nuanced, so to speak. Furthermore, collective moral regulations have influenced heterogeneous mate selection to a degree where 'naturality' exists only on the most basic of biological levels. This point is perfectly illustrated by consistently changing conceptualizations of beauty, and what constitutes a good mate. If I, and every other male in this thread, chose mates based on natural factors, we would not consider 'beauty' and 'consciousness' as determinant factors; quite simply, those females deemed to present the highest possibility of reproduction would be chosen.
  16. Senior Member
    MashedPotato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,192
    Rep Power
    719

    Reputation

    If I remember rightly Socrates (roman philosopher) was homosexual.....

    I think this thread is going to continue for many eons to come...

    So who opened up this can of worms then?!!!!
  17. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27063

    Reputation

    Homosexuality was an accepted part of Athenian culture, pedophilia, by contemporary definition, was as well.
  18. Senior Member
    MashedPotato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,192
    Rep Power
    719

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    Homosexuality was an accepted part of Athenian culture, pedophilia, by contemporary definition, was as well.
    Indeed it was.



    Ok totally unneccesary photo lmao, but i thought it relevant. Image from a roman vase.
  19. CDB
    Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2674

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    Natural law states that only genes with a survival advantage get conveyed to the next generation of a species. Clearly a homosexual gene, if it exists in such simplistic form, would not be a dominant trait. There is no survival advantage, just the opposite. By virtue of it's character, there is no reproduction at all that takes place with homosexuals so the gene would limit it's own existence.
    Which would make sense if it were a one or the other proposition. It isn't. And your natural law would then have to explain the continuing presence of homosexual behavior in a myriad of species, not just humans.
  20. Elite Member
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307852

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB View Post
    Which would make sense if it were a one or the other proposition. It isn't. And your natural law would then have to explain the continuing presence of homosexual behavior in a myriad of species, not just humans.
    Like I said, aberrant characteristics flare out at the baseline of all human curves, be it measuring sexual preference, intellect, height, weight, etc.. but the "normal" and optimal state is found past the asymptote. It's not a knock on homos of any species, it's seen in all natural sigmoids and that just is what it is.
  21. Elite Member
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307852

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    You indict homosexual as if it is some negative pathology developed through a lack of moral regulation; you're like the homophobic Durkheim.

    Homosexuality, despite what a conservative imperative may wish you to perceive, has been around since humans stopped engaging in sexual activity strictly on a procreation precedent. "Natural Law", as it were, has little to do with the contemporary interplay of the complex set of social relations we have so deemed 'society'. Viewing a set of relations so nuanced and intricate as developed society in terms of 'natural laws' is, aptly put, I suppose, primitive and archaic.
    Hold on Mullet, where did I state anything homophobic in my comments? I have not indicted any man, nor did I make any moral argument for or against anything. I have stated a fact that expresses a mathematical phenomena, nothing more. If you find love in another man's hairy ass, that is none of my beez-wax. I would never deny you your sexuality, it's just your preference I don't understand. Obviously, there is some negative and erroneous pathology involved if you desire that, let's be honest! You were not designed to receive that. But that was not my point at all and I didn't even go into that, so put your claws up ***** cat.
  22. Senior Member
    MashedPotato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,192
    Rep Power
    719

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    But that was not my point at all and I didn't even go into that, so put your claws up ***** cat.
    Talking of cats....i had to buy a new litter box today. Im fed up of sitting here talking to you guys when one of my cats comes along a dumps some toxic spill in the littler box.

    Its like some military experiment for a new bilogical stink weapon.

    So i bought one with a roof on it today and a flap for the door....and...of course they have NO IDEA where to go for a crap so they keep trying to go on the roof of the box... bah! Loose loose situation.

    Sorry, had to rant about that. Carry on.
    Last edited by MashedPotato; 10-18-2007 at 09:24 PM. Reason: cat did a turd on the box
  23. New Member
    Polynomial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    363
    Rep Power
    270

    Reputation

    I'll go ahead and translate this for others.

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D
    Like I said, aberrant characteristics flare out at the baseline of all human curves, be it measuring sexual preference, intellect, height, weight, etc..
    Translation: If you make a nice little bell curve showing height vs population of people at this height, the really tall and really short people will be at the ends of this bell curve. Genius.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.D
    but the "normal" and optimal state is found past the asymptote.
    You're going to have to explain where this asymptote is, because right now what you're saying doesn't make any sense. Do you perhaps mean "within 1 standard deviation"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.D
    It's not a knock on homos of any species, it's seen in all natural sigmoids and that just is what it is.
    I'm sure that homosexuals aren't offended by your brilliant observation that they're in the minority of the population.

    Also, "Natural Law" is a philosophical stance and what you really wanted to say originally is "Natural Selection."

    Natural Law is what the Vatican uses to say that homosexuality is bad, mmkay? Natural Selection is what someone with a misunderstanding of evolution uses to say that homosexuality is bad.
  24. Elite Member
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307852

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Polynomial View Post
    ... You're going to have to explain where this asymptote is, because right now what you're saying doesn't make any sense. Do you perhaps mean "within 1 standard deviation"?

    ... Also, "Natural Law" is a philosophical stance and what you really wanted to say originally is "Natural Selection."

    Natural Law is what the Vatican uses to say that homosexuality is bad, mmkay? Natural Selection is what someone with a misunderstanding of evolution uses to say that homosexuality is bad.
    Yes, generally considered to comprise about 66% right?

    As for the terminology as it applies to religion and philosophy, sorry to get it twisted. God forbid I misquote to the delight of the Vatican! I really don't think they have much room to point figures or cast judgment, but that's a whooooole other can of worms there.
  25. Professional Member
    ozarkaBRAND's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  175 lbs.
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    4,278
    Rep Power
    5601

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by bombBoogie View Post
    Study seeks DNA clues on homosexuality - Yahoo! News

    Does anyone believe that genetics plays a role on sexuality of straight,bi,lez,gey?
    Don't know for sure if there is a genetic impact on sexuality, but I do know that children who have older siblings who are male are more likely to be homosexual due to increased androgen exposure in the womb.
  26. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27063

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    Hold on Mullet, where did I state anything homophobic in my comments? I have not indicted any man, nor did I make any moral argument for or against anything. I have stated a fact that expresses a mathematical phenomena, nothing more. If you find love in another man's hairy ass, that is none of my beez-wax. I would never deny you your sexuality, it's just your preference I don't understand. Obviously, there is some negative and erroneous pathology involved if you desire that, let's be honest! You were not designed to receive that. But that was not my point at all and I didn't even go into that, so put your claws up ***** cat.
    You stated this:

    and a latent social agenda to encourage it. Homosexuality has always been at the bottom of the curve to some self-limited degree, but genes will not explain the recent surge of this behavior.
    and then proceed to claim your comments weren't condescending toward homosexuals. Then, in your response you explicitly express derogatory opinions toward homosexuals. Strange logic.

    What you stated, was a misrepresented statistical trait of dominant normative values-not fact. Dominant and less dominant normative values do not suggest moral imperatives, nor 'rightness' or 'wrongness' as you are doing. Simply a strong or weak representation within a sample population.
  27. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2846

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by bombBoogie View Post
    Study seeks DNA clues on homosexuality - Yahoo! News

    Does anyone believe that genetics plays a role on sexuality of straight,bi,lez,gey?
    I'm pretty convinced genetics play a role in every aspect of our lives.

    In regards to homosexuality being something other than a "behavioral preference" there is homosexuality in all of the animal world. Recently a hormonal treatment was performed on sheep that made homosexual male sheep start mounting females. This suggest that there is definitely a biological aspect in sheep, and most likely in all other animals, exhibiting homosexual behavior.
  28. Senior Member
    MashedPotato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,192
    Rep Power
    719

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00 View Post
    I'm pretty convinced genetics play a role in every aspect of our lives.

    In regards to homosexuality being something other than a "behavioral preference" there is homosexuality in all of the animal world. Recently a hormonal treatment was performed on sheep that made homosexual male sheep start mounting females. This suggest that there is definitely a biological aspect in sheep, and most likely in all other animals, exhibiting homosexual behavior.
    Not sure if your study was more recent but:

    Finding the gene, at the genome level, seems to most often involve simply poking around until an interesting bit of genetic code appears, attempting to figure out what it codes for, and then testing men and women of varying sexual orientations for differences in sequencing. One such failed experiment, done by Macke et al. (1993), demonstrates this. They hypothesized that the gene coding for androgen receptors could cause some variation in sexual orientation. When samples of about 200 gay and presumed heterosexual subjects were tested for sequence variation of the gene, no significant variation was found. Although the gene that Hamer et al. (1993) were testing did show difference in homosexual and heterosexual men (only men were tested), both show the same approach, in which a gene may simply be found by chance.

    And finally to summarize...

    A large body of evidence is growing that points to sexual orientation being genetically determined, but not necessarily a completely conclusive one. Replication is severly lacking in many areas of research into sexual orientation, the exception being the famiality studies. Consistently returning the same result of 50% of identical twins being concordant for sexual orientation, these are some of the strongest evidence in support of a genetic theory of sexual orientation. These studies also tend to be the easiest type to carry out, as they do not involve any medical technique any more invasive than the standard questionnaire. All do have the same problem of how their sample was gathered, but with such a similarity of results and such a large total sample, that factor becomes less important.
  29. Elite Member
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307852

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    ... What you stated, was a misrepresented statistical trait of dominant normative values-not fact. Dominant and less dominant normative values do not suggest moral imperatives, nor 'rightness' or 'wrongness' as you are doing. Simply a strong or weak representation within a sample population.
    Mullet, we have been friends a long time, no? You know I have no ill will for you at all and my comments were by no means derogatory. There is absolute and universal true and false though, whether we can agree on moral right and wrong, and it's related to position. My position was this: A homosexual act can not result in offspring. Can we agree that is a universally true thesis, at least by "natural" means? Therefore, if homosexuality is a genetic trait (which seems unlikely) it is indeed self-limiting. More likely, it is a genetic predisposition that is triggered by various environmental prompts and conditions.

    And as with anything human, let's not forget free will. More than anything, the bottom line is that it is a choice.
  30. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27063

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    Mullet, we have been friends a long time, no? You know I have no ill will for you at all and my comments were by no means derogatory. There is absolute and universal true and false though, whether we can agree on moral right and wrong, and it's related to position. My position was this: A homosexual act can not result in offspring. Can we agree that is a universally true thesis, at least by "natural" means? Therefore, if homosexuality is a genetic trait (which seems unlikely) it is indeed self-limiting. More likely, it is a genetic predisposition that is triggered by various environmental prompts and conditions.

    And as with anything human, let's not forget free will. More than anything, the bottom line is that it is a choice.
    I have no ill-feelings toward you D, none at all. I have appreciated your input and concern since I've been on the board.

    Just debating.

  31. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2846

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by MashedPotato View Post
    Not sure if your study was more recent but:
    A study of gay sheep appears to confirm the controversial suggestion that there is a biological basis for sexual preference.

    The work shows that rams that prefer male sexual partners had small but distinct differences in a part of the brain called the hypothalamus, when compared with rams that preferred to mate with ewes.

    Kay Larkin and colleagues from Oregon Health and Science University found the difference was in a particular region of the hypothalamus - the preoptic nucleus. The region is generally almost twice as large in rams as in ewes. But in gay rams its size was almost identical to that in "straight" females.

    The hypothalamus is known to control sex hormone release and many types of sexual behaviour. Several other parts of the hypothalamus showed consistent sex differences in size, but only this specific region showed differences that correlated with sexual preference.

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3008.html





    Looks like the "hormonal treatments" were incorrect reporting that hit the web a while back from what I'm reading now, but this was the basis of those reports.
  32. Senior Member
    MashedPotato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,192
    Rep Power
    719

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post

    And as with anything human, let's not forget free will. More than anything, the bottom line is that it is a choice.
    Sorry doc, just curious here,

    do you mean its a choice to be gay (as in the feelings) or do you mean its a choice to engage in an act of homosexuality (i.e male to male relationship)?

    And if either, Im curious as to your stand on what would happen if it were reveresed and it was infact that being homosexual was the norm and us being "straight" was the subject under scrutiny.

    I.e someone told you that it was your choice to be straight, and to conform to society we could choose not to sleep with a woman but rather a man (as is normal) or be lonely forever (i.e no partner).

    Would it then be freedom to choose and would you have a relationship with a male to be "normal"?


    Not trying to start any arguments (total respect for airing your opinion doc), your point was very valid. Im just curious of your position on that statement.
  33. Senior Member
    MashedPotato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,192
    Rep Power
    719

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00 View Post
    A study of gay sheep appears to confirm the controversial suggestion that there is a biological basis for sexual preference.

    The work shows that rams that prefer male sexual partners had small but distinct differences in a part of the brain called the hypothalamus, when compared with rams that preferred to mate with ewes.

    Kay Larkin and colleagues from Oregon Health and Science University found the difference was in a particular region of the hypothalamus - the preoptic nucleus. The region is generally almost twice as large in rams as in ewes. But in gay rams its size was almost identical to that in "straight" females.

    The hypothalamus is known to control sex hormone release and many types of sexual behaviour. Several other parts of the hypothalamus showed consistent sex differences in size, but only this specific region showed differences that correlated with sexual preference.

    Homosexuality is biological, suggests gay sheep study - 05 November 2002 - New Scientist





    Looks like the "hormonal treatments" were incorrect reporting that hit the web a while back from what I'm reading now, but this was the basis of those reports.

    Thats what I thought. This subject is very complex though and it cant simply be answered in a right or wrong answer, i.e either genetics or enviroment.

    Both play a role (i belive) and i think the basis a deep lying cause if genetic.

    I grew up with 2 sisters and a mom and yes...i played with barbies with my sisters and other girl games...but that didnt make me "homosexual". The same as I belive that same sex parents cannot make a child "homosexual" neither can a "homosexual" enviroment - one that actively encourages homosexuality.

    to elaborate on the barbie thing, and being with females while growing up, that has not made me any less of a "man" that someone who grew up in a "testosterone" enviroment. Hell I love action movies, weightlifing, Im married to a female, I like cars...etc.. all the "man things", but growing up in that enviroment gave me the aspect to understand females better (or so i think haha), so to say its mostly enviroment is complete.....cat crap (god it smells round here)
  34. Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
    Mulletsoldier's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    12,226
    Rep Power
    27063

    Reputation

    I would agree insofar as both environment (socially and physically) and inherent genetics play a role in a very complex human psychology/physiology.
  35. New Member
    Polynomial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    363
    Rep Power
    270

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    Therefore, if homosexuality is a genetic trait (which seems unlikely) it is indeed self-limiting. More likely, it is a genetic predisposition that is triggered by various environmental prompts and conditions.
    People with Down's don't mate often, yet there seems to be plenty of them going around. Uninherited genetic disorders and polygenetic diseases are examples of what you want to look into.

    Also, you're misleading when you talk about genetic traits vs. genetic predispositions. Some genes (such as for eye color) can be expressed and visible immediately at birth. Others, possibly homosexuality, may need factors (say, puberty) to be expressed. So yes, homosexuality can be a genetic trait with either unavoidable factors that cause expression, or maybe you just have to see a lot of pink and play with Barbie dolls. Who knows. Either way, the individual cannot make the choice: you have to go through puberty, and it's hard to avoid pink.

    And as with anything human, let's not forget free will. More than anything, the bottom line is that it is a choice.
    I think that a couple thousand psychologists would like to have a word with you. And by a "word with you" I mean "educate you with the clue-by-four."
  36. New Member
    Polynomial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    363
    Rep Power
    270

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by MashedPotato View Post
    cat crap (god it smells round here)
    Try using a litter box deodorizer. Also, if I clean the litter box daily the smell is almost non-existent.
  37. Elite Member
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307852

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by MashedPotato View Post
    Sorry doc, just curious here,

    do you mean its a choice to be gay (as in the feelings) or do you mean its a choice to engage in an act of homosexuality (i.e male to male relationship)?

    And if either, Im curious as to your stand on what would happen if it were reveresed and it was infact that being homosexual was the norm and us being "straight" was the subject under scrutiny.

    I.e someone told you that it was your choice to be straight, and to conform to society we could choose not to sleep with a woman but rather a man (as is normal) or be lonely forever (i.e no partner).

    Would it then be freedom to choose and would you have a relationship with a male to be "normal"?


    Not trying to start any arguments (total respect for airing your opinion doc), your point was very valid. Im just curious of your position on that statement.
    Yes, it is your choice based on a preference. Obviously, there is no true imperative that you must act on your sexual desires one way or another, so if you do you must choose to do so. As K points on, the "seat of feelings" is a major site of preference development and emotional formation. Lots and lots of chemicals are involved, peptides as well and hormones, GABA receptors, the works, so the issue is complex and probably very compounded in most cases. That's why I say this is not a 1 or 2 gene "trait" per say.

    And yes, if homosexuality were at the peak of the curve, that would be "normal" by very definition once in met the mathematical criteria (1 std dev as was noted.) If everyone turns gay and we use test tubes to generate offspring, then natural sexual relations will no longer be essential for survival. If that happens, it will in fact be normal, but it will still not be natural. Do you see the difference? Circumcision is another good example of something that is quite prevalent and normal, yet not natural either.
  38. Elite Member
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307852

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Polynomial View Post
    People with Down's don't mate often, yet there seems to be plenty of them going around. Uninherited genetic disorders and polygenetic diseases are examples of what you want to look into.
    Do you have a clue what causes Down's? Are you honestly comparing the voluntary act of engaging in homosexual behavior, with a true genetic disorder involving an entire chromosome?! If that's true, it's the best kept secret on the planet. You know something you're not telling us Poly, or is somebody just a little touchy about their gayness?
  39. New Member
    Polynomial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    363
    Rep Power
    270

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by DR.D View Post
    Do you have a clue what causes Down's? Are you honestly comparing the voluntary act of engaging in homosexual behavior, with a true genetic disorder involving an entire chromosome?! If that's true, it's the best kept secret on the planet. You know something you're not telling us Poly, or is somebody just a little touchy about their gayness?
    No, I'm comparing the act of involuntary feelings for people of the same sex with the involuntary act of being retarded.

    I'm not touchy about my gayness since I'm into people with vaginas and all, but I'm super touchy about people who say things that don't make sense, especially when it comes to math
  40. Elite Member
    DR.D's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  228 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,779
    Rep Power
    307852

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Polynomial View Post
    No, I'm comparing the act of involuntary feelings for people of the same sex with the involuntary act of being retarded.

    I'm not touchy about my gayness since I'm into people with vaginas and all, but I'm super touchy about people who say things that don't make sense, especially when it comes to math
    Haha, very well. But please give humanity some credit. We are not simply mathematical equations with complex yet predictable outcomes. The whole is much greater than the sum of it's parts. If you know quantum math, you know that nothing is real until a choice is made and it is observed to be real. Humans have the power to control their behavior. It's about the only thing in this whole world that you do honestly control. You can feel whatever you like involuntarily, but you choose your voluntary responses.
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. New Study of Green Tea on Amyloid Formation
    By Ballesteri in forum Nutrition / Health
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-08-2013, 02:29 PM
  2. Replies: 108
    Last Post: 07-24-2012, 12:52 PM
  3. Seeking your input on my latest cycle
    By HadesKrull in forum Cycle Info
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-01-2008, 10:57 PM
  4. Study finds companies snooping on employee e-mail
    By xtraflossy in forum News and Articles
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-03-2006, 09:53 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-26-2004, 04:00 PM

Posting Permissions

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