Dubstepforum.com

Genevieve wrote:Nurture isn't the same as choice.

AllNightDayDream wrote:But if they can't choose, and their sexuality is already determined, they would still have homosexual thoughts. They may suppress their sexuality in their appearance and public behavior, but as you assume, they are still homosexual.

magma wrote:

AllNightDayDream wrote:

magma wrote:

AllNightDayDream wrote:Given what we know now, there is no genetic tie or signature brain wave patterns to sexuality. No one is "born that way", as far as we know now. If we eventually find the gay gene, no one will have a choice ( ) but to accept that fact.

Since when do we "know" this? We don't even know what most of the genes in the human genome do... we're decades from being able to say we know whether sexuality is genetic.

It seems silly to discount it just because it doesn't suit your experience of the world - you've only ever experienced your brain.

You would still find some correlation in the lineage. Like I said, I can't say with 100% certainty, that's how science is, but the evidence weighs against any inherited gay trait.

This has nothing to do with my experiences. If anything, you keep posing your personal experiences as indisputable proof. If there was a genetic connection, like I said before, there'd be no denying it.

I've only posted one personal experience and it wasn't mine.

My whole argument rests on the fact that we don't (and possibly can't) know - I/you can't think with gay people's brains and nobody has fully understood the human genome yet. To hold an opinion that it's either derived fully "naturally" or through nurture is guesswork at this stage.

We simply don't know, but I'm much more comfortable with thinking it's probably a mixture of the two effects than making it a black & white issue and putting all of my chips on Red.

I agree that lineage doesn't seem to play a huge part, but that still doesn't mean it's not connected to a born trait. Plenty of people are born with a "propensity" to certain behaviour (born psychopaths with good childhoods not becoming murderers for example)... it often takes a real-world event to actually spark it. That doesn't mean that the same spark would have the same effect in all people... it's the combination that's all important.

AllNightDayDream wrote:Funny you mention that because there is a gene that gives people small amygdalas, and they have a much higher propensity to commit violent crimes. Like you say, nurture can change that, in fact the man who discovered the gene had it himself. But no such thing has been discovered for sexuality. You believe we will find one, I am more skeptical. In the absence of evidence for inherited traits, I'm inclined to believe it's environmental.

magma wrote:Hell, a dog will quite happily fuck a human's leg if it's horny... sexuality in the animal world is mental.

Genevieve wrote:

AllNightDayDream wrote:I'm kind of boggled that your guys' logic essentially goes like this:

Society doesn't like gays
Gays are born gay

Because the "People aren't born gay, therefore sexuality is a choice" argument is so much better.

I don't necessarily think all gay people are born gay. I think as with most things, there's a genetic predispostition (that varies from person to person) and nurture/experiences shapes them and the outcome may vary according to that.

Nurture isn't the same as choice. Maybe someone is born asexual or heterosexual and experiences make them gay. Doesn't mean they suddenly wake up with a craving for cock. "Oh yeah, that'll make life so much easier" And just because people "turn gay" later doesn't mean that it's a concscious choice. People never stop learning and experiencing things. How they act on those urges is obviously a choice, but urges don't fall from the sky. And "experimenting" is just that.. experimenting. Some get curious and are open to the idea that they may like it. Doesn't mean they're gay, but similarly, they are making a conscious decision to give in to that curiosity.

Besides. Our closest relatives show a lot of gay behavior and behavior is an evolutionary trait as well. From that you can deduce that our sexuality has a common origin with theirs.

Genevieve wrote:This goes further than just homosexuality. Same with pedophilia. A grown up person isn't going to concsciously decide to be attracted to toddlers. There is NO pay-off to it.

Genevieve wrote:There's reports of male ducks fucking dead ducks, though. Including male ones.

Genevieve wrote:This goes further than just homosexuality. Same with pedophilia. A grown up person isn't going to concsciously decide to be attracted to toddlers. There is NO pay-off to it.

magma wrote:

Genevieve wrote:Nurture isn't the same as choice.

Yes. This. Exactly.

Choice implies it's a conscious decision. Sexual desire is just about the least conscious of the urges we're enslaved to.

hasezwei wrote:

Genevieve wrote:This goes further than just homosexuality. Same with pedophilia. A grown up person isn't going to concsciously decide to be attracted to toddlers. There is NO pay-off to it.

thing is pedophilia shouldnt be legal anyway cause it pretty much equals rape.
i dont like it when pedophilia and homosexuality are compared to each other, its entirely different.

collige wrote:It can be argued that they're quite similar. The big difference is, for one of those actually having sex means than one of the partners is generally agreed upon to not be able to properly consent. Also, I don't think pedophilia should be criminalized at all, that's akin to legislating thought crimes; It's child abuse that's the problem. You can want to fuck whatever you want.

scspkr99 wrote: This doesn't make any sense, paedophilia is the same as heterosexual attraction if so. Which makes your point slightly less unpalatable if no less wrong.

We don't send people to prison for wanting to have sex with children. Wanting to fuck whatever isn't a crime.

JBoy wrote:Who are we to dispute what is natural and what isn't.