Why Gay?

[Brought None]

Thanks so much for posting this RubyHypatia.

 

I enjoy seeing documentary videos like this and wish evangelicals would look into these to understand how wrong it is to be antigay. It's getting harder for them to make arugments each year as more and more research keeps adding up.

[Evolution_beyond]

I remember seeing that program a few months back.

 

According to that finger thing, I seem to have one gay hand and one straight hand. Amazingly this makes sense because I'm bisexual.

 

As far as the genetics issue is concerned and worries about it being possible to 'cure' it - you can't win with these bigots. It's either something they could seek to cure or it's something you can choose.

 

Personally I think that anything to do with sexuality (not just gay, straight or bi but also kinks and fetishes) is due to psychological factors during the formative years. You may not be born with it but it's still not something that someone can choose.

[Guest QuidEstCaritas?]

Even if it is something that someone can choose, there is no real argument for the idea that they shouldn't be allowed to choose it.

 

I am suspecting that my orientation is BDSM/kinks/fetishes btw.

[Neon Genesis]

I watched this documentary yesterday and I thought it was really interesting but about the whole brother theory thing. Even though I'm gay, I only have one older sister and no brothers, so does that say anything at all about it? I found the part about the young boys playing with dolls to be interesting because I never thought there was any sort of connection between playing with dolls and being gay. It's a unique way of looking at it of playing will dolls could be a sign of homosexuality and not the causation of it. I used to play with dolls when I was a kid, but I used to play with pretty much all toys. I would play with anything from My Little Pony to Power Rangers or from Care Bears to GI Joe, although I remember my Rainbow Brite doll used to be one of my favorite toys. I also wondered if your interest in fetishes were also something you were born with because just like I wasn't able to change my sexuality, I wasn't able to change my fetishes either and my fetishes are just as much of a part of me as my sexuality is. But I've noticed lately that it seems like fundies are changing their arguments slightly. Like with that "ex" gay guy in the video admitted that you might be born gay. Fundies used to vehemently deny that you're born gay but now it seems like they're admitting you can be born gay but it's still a sin that you should deny and are trying to compare it to things like being born with a predisposition towards cigarette addictions. I think this reinforces what was said earlier that even if a gay gene or something like that was found, fundies would still be against homosexuality and would use this as proof that homosexuality is a disorder that should be cured. But if even some fundies like that guy in the video are admitting you might be born gay, doesn't this still disprove the claims of the bible since Romans claims homosexuality is unnatural yet they're admitting it's natural but should be denied anyway?

[RubyHypatia]

Thanks so much for posting this RubyHypatia.

 

I enjoy seeing documentary videos like this and wish evangelicals would look into these to understand how wrong it is to be antigay. It's getting harder for them to make arugments each year as more and more research keeps adding up.

 

Unfortunately, many Christians tend not to let science get in their way.

[RubyHypatia]

I watched this documentary yesterday and I thought it was really interesting but about the whole brother theory thing. Even though I'm gay, I only have one older sister and no brothers, so does that say anything at all about it? I found the part about the young boys playing with dolls to be interesting because I never thought there was any sort of connection between playing with dolls and being gay. It's a unique way of looking at it of playing will dolls could be a sign of homosexuality and not the causation of it. I used to play with dolls when I was a kid, but I used to play with pretty much all toys. I would play with anything from My Little Pony to Power Rangers or from Care Bears to GI Joe, although I remember my Rainbow Brite doll used to be one of my favorite toys. I also wondered if your interest in fetishes were also something you were born with because just like I wasn't able to change my sexuality, I wasn't able to change my fetishes either and my fetishes are just as much of a part of me as my sexuality is. But I've noticed lately that it seems like fundies are changing their arguments slightly. Like with that "ex" gay guy in the video admitted that you might be born gay. Fundies used to vehemently deny that you're born gay but now it seems like they're admitting you can be born gay but it's still a sin that you should deny and are trying to compare it to things like being born with a predisposition towards cigarette addictions. I think this reinforces what was said earlier that even if a gay gene or something like that was found, fundies would still be against homosexuality and would use this as proof that homosexuality is a disorder that should be cured. But if even some fundies like that guy in the video are admitting you might be born gay, doesn't this still disprove the claims of the bible since Romans claims homosexuality is unnatural yet they're admitting it's natural but should be denied anyway?

 

I grew up with a twin brother and we both played with dolls and played sports. Of course he never played with dolls in front of other boys. Neither of us are gay. People are very weird about boys and "female stuff." My husband managed a toy store and he told me if a boy dared walk down the "pink" aisle, a parent would quickly escort him back to a "boy" aisle. It was like they were worried his penis would shrivel up and he'd become gay. How silly.

[Vomit Comet]

I agree completely. Besides, there's an uneasy overlay on all this "scientific" examination of the reason(s) for homosexuality. That overlay is the intimation that there ought to be a cure.

 

There is no "reason" for being a human of any stripe, and no "cure" for it, either.

 

Actually, from the literature I've been going over recently (including public opinion polls), the science might be one of gay rights' best weapons against the Christian Right. An average American is much less likely to believe that homosexuality is "not wrong" if they at some point came to believe that homosexuality is biological in origin. In most poll data it's the top indicator of a tolerant attitude, except for one study where it was #2. This is a recent development that didn't emerge until the 1990s, from longitudinal data going back to the 70s around the time that the APA removed homosexuality from the DSM as a psychological disorder.

 

To beat the Christian Right you have to win over enough ambivalent average Americans who are queasy about homosexuality but who aren't fans of discrimination. It's not about medicalization or a cure or whatever. It's about demonstrating that the Christian Right bigots are the same idiotic fucks trying to push Intelligent Design on school kids.

[I Broke Free]

I watched this documentary yesterday and I thought it was really interesting but about the whole brother theory thing. Even though I'm gay, I only have one older sister and no brothers, so does that say anything at all about it?

 

Except for my straight twin brother, I also only have an older sister. However my sister is a lesbian, we came out to our parents two weeks apart! They loved that! I have gay male cousins on both sides of the family too, so I do think there is both a genetic and a hormonal component to homosexuality.

[Vomit Comet]

Except for my straight twin brother, I also only have an older sister. However my sister is a lesbian, we came out to our parents two weeks apart! They loved that! I have gay male cousins on both sides of the family too, so I do think there is both a genetic and a hormonal component to homosexuality.

 

It seems that the Lard must have allowed your family to be cursed by the Debil! Your great-something grandfather from seven generations back must've done something to piss Him off.

[Sexton Blake]

Obviously there cannot be a gay gene since there would be little likelihood of it being passed on to the next generation.

 

It was found out several years ago that if when a foetus was in the womb, there was lots of testosterone, when growing up the person would like women. If little testosterone, the person would like men. This was regardless of the sex of the person. If true, gays and lesbians are/can be born which would mean the homophobic stuff in the bible was down to men rather than god.

[gypsy79]

Obviously there cannot be a gay gene since there would be little likelihood of it being passed on to the next generation.

 

Could it be a recessive gene? (Disclaimer: This is not a smart ass question. I am seriously asking. I am no geneticist, that's for sure and certain.)

 

Thanks!

[Thurisaz]

<-- coughs and points at his previous comment about "need it be one single gene?"

[Ouchimoo]

Well I'm new and most of what I was going to say is said already. But I can just yap it up, right? . Gotta put my foot in the door somehow.

 

So starting off I want to talk about the 'typical gender conforming' thing. I'm female and as far as I can tell I am completely straight. However growing up the only satisfaction I had playing with dolls was if I could dismember them. I had toys of cars, trains and boats. So obviously I wasn't gender conforming at all. But I want to branch into another girls upbringing. My sister's. She was born 10 years after I was with a different mother and the same father. And her mother was very bent on girling up her daughter. Between the ages of 0 to 6 her closet was just chalk full of girly dresses and dolls and dolly things. But after the age of six her interest was more geared to hanging out with me. I saw such a huge reversal on her attitude about the girlish gender roll, because I have no interest in gender rolls. She has a lot of both male and female friends and as far as I can tell they are very gender roll conformed. So when I go and visit her I get a earful of stories about silly gender rolled media and books and clothes that her friends are in to that we view as just being, well, silly. Somebody above posted about parents pulling little boys out of the pink section and playing with girl toys, I thought it would be my two cents.

 

For the genetics part, I think it could very well be a gene with a switch. I can't think of what they are called, and I don't understand it very well yet. From the sounds of it, there are still a lot of research going into it to understand it. Essentially it's a gene that lies dormant but if something happens, like stress for example, it turns on and changes part of the make up of an animal. I know there's a specific example with fruitflies but for the life of me, I can't remember! It's very interesting if you ever run across it. Anyways, I think that hypothesis fits nicely with it running in the family and also being directly related to the history of older male children in the family.

 

Lastly as far as I have seen and can tell, that finger thing is just bunk. I don't know how they prove that 60% correlates with a long ring finger but if it's through those mind tests, it's a poor hypothesis. And 60% doesn't sound very accurate or impressive anyways. Do they study the length of the fingers right after birth and test the levels of hormones in the womb? I haven't seen anything that has stated they did. I read about it in an article way back when, and so I went around asking my friends and family members their ability to do male orientated things like math and spatial relations with the correlation of their finger. My grandmother has a longer ring finger than her pointer, and yet couldn't mathematically solve her way out of a box. As with me, I have the feminized version of the fingers and I can't do math to save my life but I can do very well on spatial relations. I think that is because when I was in high school I spent a lot of time in shop drawing out 3D dimensions, in art drawing out 3D dimensions and having a big interest in animation. Lastly my husband has a feminized version of the fingers and believe you me, we have that whole Men from Mars Women from Venus thing going on when we are trying to communicate. Now if they do study the length of the finger right after birth and determine it really is from levels of hormones then I recant (as with reading "your inner fish" I have discovered that the gene for making fingers can be manipulated with chemicals such as vitamin A) but I still find it bogus to determine somebodies male or female mental orientation based on that alone.

 

Well that was long winded.

[gypsy79]

<-- coughs and points at his previous comment about "need it be one single gene?"

 

I get that. I'm sure it's not. Was just trying to bring up/ask about a different point.

[Abiyoyo]

Even if it turns out it isn't based in genetics, people should still be allowed to be themselves.

 

Did you know there is a movement that wants to legalize adult incest, making it legal to marry within family at an adult age? Dad could marry adult daughter. Mom could marry adult son, etc.

 

Anyhow, like you said, people should be allowed to just be themselves, right?

[Neon Genesis]

Is the whole "let's compare homosexuality to incest" argument even worth responding to at this point?

[Vomit Comet]

Did you know there is a movement that wants to legalize adult incest, making it legal to marry within family at an adult age? Dad could marry adult daughter. Mom could marry adult son, etc.

 

Anyhow, like you said, people should be allowed to just be themselves, right?

 

I don't know what's worse, that or the "people will start fucking dogs" argument. For Christ's sake!

[Abiyoyo]

It's relevant to someone that is not blind Matter a fact, I think it's more relevant than homosexuality. Homosexuality In a sexual view, as the OP mentioned, it doesn't quite make sense. Someone in another thread made a comment which may be true. Evolution countering over population. ??Possible.

[woodsmoke]

Um, no, actually, it makes perfect sense on a larger scale. That individual's genetic line may not continue, but there are any number of reasons why his presence is considered a boon to the tribe/pack/herd. He can do everything the other males in the group do, but his contribution isn't counter-balanced by competition for mates. While the heterosexual males are spending half their time chasing tail and defending their mates/status, he's still contributing to the welfare of the group as a whole.

 

Did you know there is a movement that wants to legalize adult incest, making it legal to marry within family at an adult age? Dad could marry adult daughter. Mom could marry adult son, etc.

...And? How does Jimbo marrying his little sister in the deep south affect you anymore than Francis and his boyfriend marrying each other in Massachusetts? The chances of either of them knocking on your door and attempting to break up your marriage and/or convert you are essentially the same - i.e. Not Gonna' Happen.

 

Come on, YoYo, you've been trolling here long enough to know you're going to have to come up with something way more sensational than that to get any appreciable response out of us.

[Neon Genesis]

I can use slippery slope arguments, too. If Christians ban gay marriage, next thing you know they'll want to ban the non-religious from getting married and then they'll want to start murdering gays like they're already doing in Uganda. You know that most Christians who claim that the OT law is superseded by the NT are only saying that because they don't have total control anymore and they know it's politically incorrect to say they want to murder gays when you know they want to, but you know the moment xtians get that control back, the first thing they'll do is bring back the OT laws.

[Thurisaz]

Even if it turns out it isn't based in genetics, people should still be allowed to be themselves.

 

Did you know there is a movement that wants to legalize adult incest, making it legal to marry within family at an adult age? Dad could marry adult daughter. Mom could marry adult son, etc.

 

Anyhow, like you said, people should be allowed to just be themselves, right?

 

So what?

If all participants are adult, sane and consensual, what harm is done?

 

And before you try to play the "risk of genetically defect offspring" card: 1. that's a thing of procreation not of sex itself, 2. as long as otherwise genetically handicapped people are allowed to have sex, any law that prohibits incestual sex is not fair.

 

Many won't like that POV, no doubt... but if laws are supposed to be just then this is what it should be like.

[Neon Genesis]

YoYo should watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PooEhBxh0NY...feature=related

[I Broke Free]

I'm female and as far as I can tell I am completely straight. However growing up the only satisfaction I had playing with dolls was if I could dismember them.

 

 

Gay male here. Dolls? Yea I loved them as a kid. My brother and I would cram them full of fireworks and explode them for fun! Running a magnifying glass across them on a sunny day was fun too. My older sister was lesbian and hated her Easy-Bake-Oven, so I did get that. Any toy that makes things you can eat is on my A-List.

[Kuroikaze]

Even if it turns out it isn't based in genetics, people should still be allowed to be themselves.

 

Did you know there is a movement that wants to legalize adult incest, making it legal to marry within family at an adult age? Dad could marry adult daughter. Mom could marry adult son, etc.

 

Anyhow, like you said, people should be allowed to just be themselves, right?

 

 

I'm not sure I find this quite as deplorable as you seem to. Weird perhaps, its not something I'd want to do, but I'm not sure it would bother me a whole lot if someone else did it.

 

The only real issue is one of genetics, in that there is a greater risk of genetic defects for children of these couples. Which, of course, is the most likely reason we have evolved an aversion to such relationships in the first place. However some people either don't have this aversion or overcome it. Beyond a concern that they not give birth babies with birth defects I'm not terribly concerned about it.

[woodsmoke]

Which, as Thur pointed out above, is at best a hollow concern, on account of there are no laws or social mores restricting or discouraging mentally retarded people from breeding, which carries essentially the same potential for genetic abnormalities in children.