Is homosexuality a choice or is it genetic?

[Mare Tranquillity]

Depends on whether you're talking about the orientation before or after birth.

Since environment trumps the innate in this respect, it doesn't really matter what orientation one is born under. In fact, science does provide evidence that we all are born with generic hormones that cause us to want to copulate... With what or whom may be molded as we fumble around through puberty.

David Carradine learned to "get off" apparently in a very self-destructive way..

And so on..

Keep tryin', Siho, you're bound to say something sometime. Are you really as bitter as your posts would suggest?

 

[Sihouette]

Mare defines "bitter"= A stark reminder of a reality he'd rather not examine.

Probably much like when you look down between your legs and don't want to think about the origin of the mess being an enviromental one...you know, like a therapist could've walked you through instead of an unscrupulous urologist ignoring the obvious and making a buck at the same time..

Just because a urologist has a specialty in the urinary systems and genital morphology, doesn't mean he got high grades in the psyche classes s/he was required to take. And even if they did, there is an ethics part to a degree which cannot be taught. And quite obviously those people handling your mutilation did not clear the ethics hurdle.

They're not alone. I think the majority of people nowadays would easily shelve their ethical reservations in trade for not always even just money, but instead for just "fitting in", lest they be called "bitter" or some such punishment the PC establishment of the day uses as a whip to keep them from speaking their truth..

 

[Sihouette]

People in the differing fields of science and arts don't communicate as often as they should. They really don't. What most "scientists" do is get a degree and then bow to the whip of acedemia's stuffy halls and "consensus".. *retch*.

Sure, you need consensus in the sense that other people's data needs to jibe with your own. But in practice, what consensus actually means is 'the approval' of so-and-so who ranks in that field. That's why it takes generations for important discoveries to "become fact". Old rankers need to actually die out before challenges to their ego-trip are allowed to be examined seriously.

We've seen examples of that in this debate. Each and every time I bring up the field of AI [artificial insemination] in varying species in the agriculture industry, and how these experts have found sexuality in mammals and even other species to be malleable...a fact to which the very food on your table [dear reader] depends on each and every single day..the entire industry is put-down as "redneck" "rural" "ignorant" etc. True, the scientists in the AI field aren't sitting in some dusty library reading about their field and occasionally tinkering in the lab to test some new theory. They are however out in the lab each and every single day, week after week, month after month, year after year, and never finding anything different than the fact that sexual-preference can be molded.

Now, what the religion of the particular fetishes known as "GLBT" are doing, is akin to what christian science attempts to do. They are inserting utter nonsense into a viable field [comparative psychology] to try to "prove" that "we [alone, of all other mammals except the human mammal] were born this way". Just like the fossils of dinosaurs are only 6,000 years old, or just "random formations" that look like bones...lol..

Really, I know y'all hate to hear it, but the real achey-breaky fact of the matter is that no matter what your sexual preference is at birth, you can be classically conditioned to prefer something else if the environment gets ahold of you at a young and crucial [malleable] age. So environment, factually, trumps innate. And because this is so, making gay marriage legal [read: "normal"] within our society is setting up conditions in the social environment to favor an increase in the numbers of homosexual people.

Some like this quite a lot. [those already fixated in that orientation and woeful about the lack of partners availible] and some don't. [usually people with children who realize how impressionable they are].

Environment rules in molding sexual-preference. The AI industry has proven it hands down. Time for the other acedemics to pull their heads out and look around. Of course there will be the handful of "studies" that "prove" sexual orientation is innate and that environment "has nothing to do with it". Just as there will always be handfuls of "studies" that "prove" dinosaur fossils are "only 6,000 years old"...lol...and so on..

There is nothing more abhorrent to the human condition than wilfull lying to forward a politica agenda. Worse still is the manipulation of science to show something that isn't. The nazis tried this with the jews, to "prove" they were "inferior". But you'd never catch a GLBT accepting that false propoganda could be a shared disease with the likes of them..

No, of course not...lol..

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Mare defines "bitter"= A stark reminder of a reality he'd rather not examine.

Probably much like when you look down between your legs and don't want to think about the origin of the mess being an enviromental one...you know, like a therapist could've walked you through instead of an unscrupulous urologist ignoring the obvious and making a buck at the same time..

Just because a urologist has a specialty in the urinary systems and genital morphology, doesn't mean he got high grades in the psyche classes s/he was required to take. And even if they did, there is an ethics part to a degree which cannot be taught. And quite obviously those people handling your mutilation did not clear the ethics hurdle.

They're not alone. I think the majority of people nowadays would easily shelve their ethical reservations in trade for not always even just money, but instead for just "fitting in", lest they be called "bitter" or some such punishment the PC establishment of the day uses as a whip to keep them from speaking their truth..

A bitter personal attack based on near total ignorance of the subject. Just about what we've come to expect from you, Siho. You can't insult me, I'm immune, I had so much sh1t dumped on me by people like you that I learned to let it roll off without even leaving a smell.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

People in the differing fields of science and arts don't communicate as often as they should. They really don't. What most "scientists" do is get a degree and then bow to the whip of acedemia's stuffy halls and "consensus".. *retch*.

Sure, you need consensus in the sense that other people's data needs to jibe with your own. But in practice, what consensus actually means is 'the approval' of so-and-so who ranks in that field. That's why it takes generations for important discoveries to "become fact". Old rankers need to actually die out before challenges to their ego-trip are allowed to be examined seriously.

We've seen examples of that in this debate. Each and every time I bring up the field of AI [artificial insemination] in varying species in the agriculture industry, and how these experts have found sexuality in mammals and even other species to be malleable...a fact to which the very food on your table [dear reader] depends on each and every single day..the entire industry is put-down as "redneck" "rural" "ignorant" etc. True, the scientists in the AI field aren't sitting in some dusty library reading about their field and occasionally tinkering in the lab to test some new theory. They are however out in the lab each and every single day, week after week, month after month, year after year, and never finding anything different than the fact that sexual-preference can be molded.

Now, what the religion of the particular fetishes known as "GLBT" are doing, is akin to what christian science attempts to do. They are inserting utter nonsense into a viable field [comparative psychology] to try to "prove" that "we [alone, of all other mammals except the human mammal] were born this way". Just like the fossils of dinosaurs are only 6,000 years old, or just "random formations" that look like bones...lol..

Really, I know y'all hate to hear it, but the real achey-breaky fact of the matter is that no matter what your sexual preference is at birth, you can be classically conditioned to prefer something else if the environment gets ahold of you at a young and crucial [malleable] age. So environment, factually, trumps innate. And because this is so, making gay marriage legal [read: "normal"] within our society is setting up conditions in the social environment to favor an increase in the numbers of homosexual people.

Some like this quite a lot. [those already fixated in that orientation and woeful about the lack of partners availible] and some don't. [usually people with children who realize how impressionable they are].

Environment rules in molding sexual-preference. The AI industry has proven it hands down. Time for the other acedemics to pull their heads out and look around. Of course there will be the handful of "studies" that "prove" sexual orientation is innate and that environment "has nothing to do with it". Just as there will always be handfuls of "studies" that "prove" dinosaur fossils are "only 6,000 years old"...lol...and so on..

There is nothing more abhorrent to the human condition than wilfull lying to forward a politica agenda. Worse still is the manipulation of science to show something that isn't. The nazis tried this with the jews, to "prove" they were "inferior". But you'd never catch a GLBT accepting that false propoganda could be a shared disease with the likes of them..No, of course not...lol..

You're posts would be funny if they weren't so sad. Go the the KKK website, Siho, there must be something there that you can use as ammunition because you are shooting blanks with this nonsense.

 

[Sihouette]

Bitter, laughable, nonsensical.

Got any other weapons in your "keep them politically correct" arsenal of ad hominems?

Maybe the moderators here feel sorry for you, and that's why they're allowing you to run on as you do. Please offer substance in your rebuttals or I'll maybe push the issue of curbing your ad hominems.

 

[Dr.Who]

The fact that one's appetite changes at different times in their life is a well-known fact. Do you always eat the same foods? If you could eat one kind of food that supplied all the nutrients you need, would that satisfy you? I bet not. You know as well as I do that sexual appetites change over time, do you and your wife always do the same thing?

You and Siho are laboring under the weight of a "morality" issue around homosexuality which skews your perceptions.

Your analogy works perfectly for me. I am not strictly vegetarian or carnivorous and it would be crazy to try to force a label to fit me.

I make choices about what I eat. My gustatory appetite changes all the time and I so do people's sexual appetites.

 

[Dr.Who]

A falsehood told often enough soon gains the substance of truth--or at least that's the hope, right?

Right.

The falsehood that people are straight or gay or bi is told all the time. While it is abundantly clear that all sorts of people have sex with all sorts of other people (and beyond).

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Right.

The falsehood that people are straight or gay or bi is told all the time. While it is abundantly clear that all sorts of people have sex with all sorts of other people (and beyond).

So, are you saying that there is no such thing as sexual orientation? Anybody will do anything with anybody/anything?

Or are you saying that there need to be more than 3 sexual orientations recognized? I think we recognize just these three because almost all the others require sex with someone other than a consenting adult and that's not legal.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Bitter, laughable, nonsensical.

Got any other weapons in your "keep them politically correct" arsenal of ad hominems?

Maybe the moderators here feel sorry for you, and that's why they're allowing you to run on as you do. Please offer substance in your rebuttals or I'll maybe push the issue of curbing your ad hominems.

Push if you like, Siho. You give me a raft of crop in post #1292 for accepting the American Medical Association's very successful treatment for my birth defect, a treatment that has been used now for more than 40 years, while at the same time you make a living performing sexual abuse on animals.

Maybe you're right and the mods feel sorry for me having to put up with some of the really ignorant people who post on internet discussion sites.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Your analogy works perfectly for me. I am not strictly vegetarian or carnivorous and it would be crazy to try to force a label to fit me.

I make choices about what I eat. My gustatory appetite changes all the time and I so do people's sexual appetites.

Does this suggest that you have gay sex now and then? Sex with animals? Under age people? Just because some people's tastes vary a lot doesn't mean that everyone's does, and as long as the expression of your tastes remains within the confines of sex with other consenting adults you should not be subject to religious or governmental interference, should you?

 

[Dr.Who]

So, are you saying that there is no such thing as sexual orientation? Anybody will do anything with anybody/anything?

Or are you saying that there need to be more than 3 sexual orientations recognized? I think we recognize just these three because almost all the others require sex with someone other than a consenting adult and that's not legal.

It would make more sense to get rid of the artificial labels of sexual orientation as the variety of sexual orientation appears to be limitless. If we create new labels for every orientations a person has we would have hundreds of thousands of them: same sex, opposite sex, bi, young, children, animals, feet, same sex feet, crossdressing, TG, lingerie, fluffy stuffed animals, inanimate objects, breasts, buts, legs, muscles, fat, old, large sexual organs, twinks, bears, latex, bdsm, cwnm, sexual toys, machines, anal, oral, etc.

I see no reason to label one fetish an orientation and another fetish just a fetish. Preference for gender is no different than preference for a particular age or other fetish.

 

[Dr.Who]

Push if you like, Siho. You give me a raft of crop in post #1292 for accepting the American Medical Association's very successful treatment for my birth defect, a treatment that has been used now for more than 40 years, while at the same time you make a living performing sexual abuse on animals.

Maybe you're right and the mods feel sorry for me having to put up with some of the really ignorant people who post on internet discussion sites.

I agree that it is entirely possible that you had a birth defect and that the best treatment was sex reassignment surgery.

 

[Bunz]

OK Folks,
After nearly two years, and over 1300 posts in this thread I am going to close it for the time being. If you would like it back open please message me, and that could be arrainged. This has gotten off topic and personal. So at the very least we will be giving a cooling off period.

As a side note, for those who participated in the thread, and kept at it for literally years...I admire your conviction and dedication. Because I know personally, I often drop out of threads half way through, usually because of personal time issues(never because I was proven wrong