Debate Now Prove your case! Is Homosexuality genetic or a choice?

[flacaltenn]

Having a real life keeps me from reading all 75 pages to catch up. But this is CLOSE to all the proof need that homosexually is LARGELY choice.

Has anyone mentioned the very large BISEXUAL community? Or the PolyAmory contingents? Active bisexuals are all the proof I require that this IS largely a choice issue.. Bisexuals choose at whim. Many seem to be happier as Bi than the LesGay community as a whole.. And they often resolve happily for long time periods -- being one or the another with the right mate..

What are you jabbering about? It's apparent that you are terribly confused about the difference between lifestyle choices and sexual orientation. Yes, those who are bisexual can and do, at various points in there life, chose to live as and have relationships which people of the same or opposite gender. They are still bisexual- as fixed sexual orientation as is homosexual and heterosexual. That does not mean that sexual orientation is a choice.

And you are throwing polyamory into the mix? Why? That is completely irrelevant and serves no purpose other than to obfuscate the issue

Oh hell no.. That's your confusion between the terms lifestyle choice and sexual orientation. The question of the thread is sexual orientation a "lifestyle choice" or is biologically ascribed. A BI-sexual women or man CHOOSING to be either hetero or gay AT WILL is a choice. If it's a women they will be full bore gay lesbian for a while when it PLEASES them. Same with men. Full out GAY for a month or 10 years. With maybe a few swings back to hetero. They are a LARGE part of the LGBT community. Their sexual orientation is whatever MATE(s) pleases them at the time.

I doubt you could tell the diff between a loving long term BI relationship and a gay one.

And the polyamory people take it a step further and commit to multi-couple "sexual orientation". Many insist on having "marriage ceremonies" to show their commitment. SOME of these are more spouse swapping, but a large fraction have loving relations with any portion or any one. You really have to "love a guy" and commit to them to BE polyamorous..

You're just hung up on a special case where these commitments are EXCLUSIVE -- one way or the other. And that exclusivity doesn't change the commitment, love or passion that's involved. Bi people have the same prescription for finding a mate.. Also often based on having a "male dominant" or "female submissive" type of roles.
Who are you talking to and what are you trying to say. Go lay down and come back when the crack high wears off.
If it's "just an act" -- it's pretty much indistinguishable from pedigreed gay...

Bisexuals in committed "gay" relationships are INDISTIGUISHABLE from pedigreed gays or lesbians. Except they exercise each relationship maneuver by CHOICE. And can swing from hetero to "gay" at will. Kinda hard to find a "biological marker" for the ability to CHOOSE something? Isn't it?

Maybe they just don't make such distinctions. They are sexually attracted to just certain people regardless of the gender.

If sexual compatibility and fulfillment wasn't an important of relationships --- you'd have something there. But it IS. Which means that Bi's can choose partners based on hetero/homo choice. And their "lives" as either are no different from folks that are strictly one or t'other.

 

[ChrisL]

What are you jabbering about? It's apparent that you are terribly confused about the difference between lifestyle choices and sexual orientation. Yes, those who are bisexual can and do, at various points in there life, chose to live as and have relationships which people of the same or opposite gender. They are still bisexual- as fixed sexual orientation as is homosexual and heterosexual. That does not mean that sexual orientation is a choice.

And you are throwing polyamory into the mix? Why? That is completely irrelevant and serves no purpose other than to obfuscate the issue

Oh hell no.. That's your confusion between the terms lifestyle choice and sexual orientation. The question of the thread is sexual orientation a "lifestyle choice" or is biologically ascribed. A BI-sexual women or man CHOOSING to be either hetero or gay AT WILL is a choice. If it's a women they will be full bore gay lesbian for a while when it PLEASES them. Same with men. Full out GAY for a month or 10 years. With maybe a few swings back to hetero. They are a LARGE part of the LGBT community. Their sexual orientation is whatever MATE(s) pleases them at the time.

I doubt you could tell the diff between a loving long term BI relationship and a gay one.

And the polyamory people take it a step further and commit to multi-couple "sexual orientation". Many insist on having "marriage ceremonies" to show their commitment. SOME of these are more spouse swapping, but a large fraction have loving relations with any portion or any one. You really have to "love a guy" and commit to them to BE polyamorous..

You're just hung up on a special case where these commitments are EXCLUSIVE -- one way or the other. And that exclusivity doesn't change the commitment, love or passion that's involved. Bi people have the same prescription for finding a mate.. Also often based on having a "male dominant" or "female submissive" type of roles.
Who are you talking to and what are you trying to say. Go lay down and come back when the crack high wears off.
If it's "just an act" -- it's pretty much indistinguishable from pedigreed gay...

Bisexuals in committed "gay" relationships are INDISTIGUISHABLE from pedigreed gays or lesbians. Except they exercise each relationship maneuver by CHOICE. And can swing from hetero to "gay" at will. Kinda hard to find a "biological marker" for the ability to CHOOSE something? Isn't it?

Maybe they just don't make such distinctions. They are sexually attracted to just certain people regardless of the gender.

If sexual compatibility and fulfillment wasn't an important of relationships --- you'd have something there. But it IS. Which means that Bi's can choose partners based on hetero/homo choice. And their "lives" as either are no different from folks that are strictly one or t'other.

I think you miss my point. I'm saying maybe bisexuals are capable of having sexual compatibility and fulfillment based on "individuals" that they meet rather than the specific gender of the individual. So, they might meet a woman and fall in love or a man because the gender of the individual doesn't play a role for them.

 

[flacaltenn]

Oh hell no.. That's your confusion between the terms lifestyle choice and sexual orientation. The question of the thread is sexual orientation a "lifestyle choice" or is biologically ascribed. A BI-sexual women or man CHOOSING to be either hetero or gay AT WILL is a choice. If it's a women they will be full bore gay lesbian for a while when it PLEASES them. Same with men. Full out GAY for a month or 10 years. With maybe a few swings back to hetero. They are a LARGE part of the LGBT community. Their sexual orientation is whatever MATE(s) pleases them at the time.

I doubt you could tell the diff between a loving long term BI relationship and a gay one.

And the polyamory people take it a step further and commit to multi-couple "sexual orientation". Many insist on having "marriage ceremonies" to show their commitment. SOME of these are more spouse swapping, but a large fraction have loving relations with any portion or any one. You really have to "love a guy" and commit to them to BE polyamorous..

You're just hung up on a special case where these commitments are EXCLUSIVE -- one way or the other. And that exclusivity doesn't change the commitment, love or passion that's involved. Bi people have the same prescription for finding a mate.. Also often based on having a "male dominant" or "female submissive" type of roles.
Who are you talking to and what are you trying to say. Go lay down and come back when the crack high wears off.
If it's "just an act" -- it's pretty much indistinguishable from pedigreed gay...

Bisexuals in committed "gay" relationships are INDISTIGUISHABLE from pedigreed gays or lesbians. Except they exercise each relationship maneuver by CHOICE. And can swing from hetero to "gay" at will. Kinda hard to find a "biological marker" for the ability to CHOOSE something? Isn't it?

Maybe they just don't make such distinctions. They are sexually attracted to just certain people regardless of the gender.

If sexual compatibility and fulfillment wasn't an important of relationships --- you'd have something there. But it IS. Which means that Bi's can choose partners based on hetero/homo choice. And their "lives" as either are no different from folks that are strictly one or t'other.

I think you miss my point. I'm saying maybe bisexuals are capable of having sexual compatibility and fulfillment based on "individuals" that they meet rather than the specific gender of the individual. So, they might meet a woman and fall in love or a man because the gender of the individual doesn't play a role for them.

I get that. And that's what's happens. But IT SEEMS that like Bi folk DO consider sexual fulfillment and choice when they make a change in mate. OR keep one "on the side"..

Certainly there ARE biological markers that make men "feminine" and women "masculine". These are well known and display the most in the "trans" sector of the LGBLT sandwich. But majority of "gay" relationships INCLUDING bisexuals are definitely ACTING on choice. Even for the most feminine of women and the most "masculine" of men..

 

[ChrisL]

Bisexuals in committed "gay" relationships are INDISTIGUISHABLE from pedigreed gays or lesbians. Except they exercise each relationship maneuver by CHOICE. And can swing from hetero to "gay" at will. Kinda hard to find a "biological marker" for the ability to CHOOSE something? Isn't it?

Maybe they just don't make such distinctions. They are sexually attracted to just certain people regardless of the gender.

If sexual compatibility and fulfillment wasn't an important of relationships --- you'd have something there. But it IS. Which means that Bi's can choose partners based on hetero/homo choice. And their "lives" as either are no different from folks that are strictly one or t'other.

I think you miss my point. I'm saying maybe bisexuals are capable of having sexual compatibility and fulfillment based on "individuals" that they meet rather than the specific gender of the individual. So, they might meet a woman and fall in love or a man because the gender of the individual doesn't play a role for them.

I get that. And that's what's happens. But IT SEEMS that like Bi folk DO consider sexual fulfillment and choice when they make a change in mate. OR keep one "on the side"..

Certainly there ARE biological markers that make men "feminine" and women "masculine". These are well know and display the most in the "trans" sector of the LGBLT sandwich. But majority of "gay" relationships INCLUDING bisexuals are definitely ACTING on choice. Even for the most feminine of women and the most "masculine" of men..

Well, I don't think it's a choice. It's not a choice for me that I'm attracted to men. That's just how it is.

 

[flacaltenn]

Bisexuals in committed "gay" relationships are INDISTIGUISHABLE from pedigreed gays or lesbians. Except they exercise each relationship maneuver by CHOICE. And can swing from hetero to "gay" at will. Kinda hard to find a "biological marker" for the ability to CHOOSE something? Isn't it?

Maybe they just don't make such distinctions. They are sexually attracted to just certain people regardless of the gender.

If sexual compatibility and fulfillment wasn't an important of relationships --- you'd have something there. But it IS. Which means that Bi's can choose partners based on hetero/homo choice. And their "lives" as either are no different from folks that are strictly one or t'other.

I think you miss my point. I'm saying maybe bisexuals are capable of having sexual compatibility and fulfillment based on "individuals" that they meet rather than the specific gender of the individual. So, they might meet a woman and fall in love or a man because the gender of the individual doesn't play a role for them.

I get that. And that's what's happens. But IT SEEMS that like Bi folk DO consider sexual fulfillment and choice when they make a change in mate. OR keep one "on the side"..

Certainly there ARE biological markers that make men "feminine" and women "masculine". These are well know and display the most in the "trans" sector of the LGBLT sandwich. But majority of "gay" relationships INCLUDING bisexuals are definitely ACTING on choice. Even for the most feminine of women and the most "masculine" of men..

Well, I don't think it's a choice. It's not a choice for me that I'm attracted to men. That's just how it is.

There would be no real expectation for you to choose a women as a better mate. To do that -- you'd have to be ignoring A LOT of social conditioning and intimate details.. HOWEVER -- should you TRY IT and find it AGREEABLE -- you might see it differently. Even WITHOUT your DNA involved.

 

[flacaltenn]

My excuse for not trying it --- is too damn many hot women. And I stick to what I'm good at !!!!

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

A small correction: "choice" would come under nurture/environment. The homophobic theory being two gay men raise a baby boy and that baby grows into a gay man. You and I appear agreed it doesn't work that way. Odds are, about 98%, that the boy will be straight since sexual preference is innate.

Having a real life keeps me from reading all 75 pages to catch up. But this is CLOSE to all the proof need that homosexually is LARGELY choice.

Has anyone mentioned the very large BISEXUAL community? Or the PolyAmory contingents? Active bisexuals are all the proof I require that this IS largely a choice issue.. Bisexuals choose at whim. Many seem to be happier as Bi than the LesGay community as a whole.. And they often resolve happily for long time periods -- being one or the another with the right mate..

What are you jabbering about? It's apparent that you are terribly confused about the difference between lifestyle choices and sexual orientation. Yes, those who are bisexual can and do, at various points in there life, chose to live as and have relationships which people of the same or opposite gender. They are still bisexual- as fixed sexual orientation as is homosexual and heterosexual. That does not mean that sexual orientation is a choice.

And you are throwing polyamory into the mix? Why? That is completely irrelevant and serves no purpose other than to obfuscate the issue

Oh hell no.. That's your confusion between the terms lifestyle choice and sexual orientation. The question of the thread is sexual orientation a "lifestyle choice" or is biologically ascribed. A BI-sexual women or man CHOOSING to be either hetero or gay AT WILL is a choice. If it's a women they will be full bore gay lesbian for a while when it PLEASES them. Same with men. Full out GAY for a month or 10 years. With maybe a few swings back to hetero. They are a LARGE part of the LGBT community. Their sexual orientation is whatever MATE(s) pleases them at the time.

I doubt you could tell the diff between a loving long term BI relationship and a gay one.

And the polyamory people take it a step further and commit to multi-couple "sexual orientation". Many insist on having "marriage ceremonies" to show their commitment. SOME of these are more spouse swapping, but a large fraction have loving relations with any portion or any one. You really have to "love a guy" and commit to them to BE polyamorous..

You're just hung up on a special case where these commitments are EXCLUSIVE -- one way or the other. And that exclusivity doesn't change the commitment, love or passion that's involved. Bi people have the same prescription for finding a mate.. Also often based on having a "male dominant" or "female submissive" type of roles.
Who are you talking to and what are you trying to say. Go lay down and come back when the crack high wears off.
If it's "just an act" -- it's pretty much indistinguishable from pedigreed gay...

Bisexuals in committed "gay" relationships are INDISTIGUISHABLE from pedigreed gays or lesbians. Except they exercise each relationship maneuver by CHOICE. And can swing from hetero to "gay" at will. Kinda hard to find a "biological marker" for the ability to CHOOSE something? Isn't it?

Bisexuals in committed "gay" relationships are INDISTIGUISHABLE from pedigreed gays or lesbians.

OK, I can agree with that. That would be true for the casual observer. So, what is the point?

Except they exercise each relationship maneuver by CHOICE. And can swing from hetero to "gay" at will..

Ok, they chose their relationships - opposite sex or same sex - because they can. I'm jealous! So many more possibilities for sexual fulfillment ! But, "Can can swing from hetero to "gay" at will?? Do you think that represents a change in sexual orientation , or sexual behavior? Do you understand the difference?

Kinda hard to find a "biological marker" for the ability to CHOOSE something? Isn't it?

It's a developing science that has begun to understand why some people are predisposed if not compelled to be gay or bisexual. Hard but not impossible . Again, what is the point of all of this-why does it matter?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Bisexuals in committed "gay" relationships are INDISTIGUISHABLE from pedigreed gays or lesbians. Except they exercise each relationship maneuver by CHOICE. And can swing from hetero to "gay" at will. Kinda hard to find a "biological marker" for the ability to CHOOSE something? Isn't it?

Maybe they just don't make such distinctions. They are sexually attracted to just certain people regardless of the gender.

If sexual compatibility and fulfillment wasn't an important of relationships --- you'd have something there. But it IS. Which means that Bi's can choose partners based on hetero/homo choice. And their "lives" as either are no different from folks that are strictly one or t'other.

I think you miss my point. I'm saying maybe bisexuals are capable of having sexual compatibility and fulfillment based on "individuals" that they meet rather than the specific gender of the individual. So, they might meet a woman and fall in love or a man because the gender of the individual doesn't play a role for them.

I get that. And that's what's happens. But IT SEEMS that like Bi folk DO consider sexual fulfillment and choice when they make a change in mate. OR keep one "on the side"..

Certainly there ARE biological markers that make men "feminine" and women "masculine". These are well known and display the most in the "trans" sector of the LGBLT sandwich. But majority of "gay" relationships INCLUDING bisexuals are definitely ACTING on choice. Even for the most feminine of women and the most "masculine" of men..

Apparently you have not read up on epigenetics. I posted info about that right here. Again, you - like others her- are using "choice " indiscriminately and not really being clear about sexual orientation and the choice of sexual behavior. Do you understand that people who are exclusively attracted to either the same or opposite gender are not choosing and do not have a choice?

 

[flacaltenn]

Ok, they chose their relationships - opposite sex or same sex - because they can. I'm jealous! So many more possibilities for sexual fulfillment ! But, "Can can swing from hetero to "gay" at will?? Do you think that represents a change in sexual orientation , or sexual behavior? Do you understand the difference?

Just when we're making progress -- you blow out a critical noun with "Can can swing from hetero to gay at will"?
I guess that's a critical critical if we knew who can can was !!

Kinda hard to find a "biological marker" for the ability to CHOOSE something? Isn't it?

It's a developing science that has begun to understand why some people are predisposed if not compelled to be gay or bisexual. Hard but not impossible . Again, what is the point of all of this-why does it matter?

I don't KNOW why it matters. There's an agenda here somewheres. The LGBTQ community does NOT want it to be "choice", because then all their opposition will be trying to cure them. And someone doesn't really want it to be biologically predisposed. Maybe again, the gay comm. because it will be looked on as a deficit and possibly lead to pre-natal selection.

I just get angry when folks think THEY KNOW -- it's all one way or the other.

I KNOW there are biological reasons for a LOT of the trans folks. Not all. But there are MEDICALLY legitimate cases for sex ambiguities. And I KNOW that some folks are biologically soundly male or female but have definite physical and personality traits of the other sex.

I also KNOW (with the chart from GLAAD below) that BISEXUALS are the MAJORITY of the LGBTQ community.

And for Bisexuals, I don't think there's any biological evidence at all. Seems to me, it's a choice based on experience and fulfillment..

 

[Boss]

Well, I don't think it's a choice. It's not a choice for me that I'm attracted to men. That's just how it is.

You continue to have the point sail comfortably over your empty little head.

Whenever you copulate with a male, do you not make a conscious choice?

Now... Let's say, the male wants it and you don't feel like it... does that mean you're homosexual? ....not attracted to males? No... it simply means you made a choice.

Since this is so much fun... let's now imagine your rejected would-be lover ends up at the local bar where he meets a semi-attractive lesbian woman. They get to talking, she has had a fight with her girlfriend and is feeling kind of lonely... they start drinking. Next thing you know, she is sleeping with him. Does that make her bisexual and no longer homosexual? Or did she just make a choice?

And the guy, after making passionate love to the lesbian, confesses to her... He doesn't know why he keeps sleeping with women, he is actually attracted to men! ...Is he homo or hetero? She's a lesbian, maybe he's bi? .....Choices! People make choices, dear.

 

[ChrisL]

Well, I don't think it's a choice. It's not a choice for me that I'm attracted to men. That's just how it is.

You continue to have the point sail comfortably over your empty little head.

Whenever you copulate with a male, do you not make a conscious choice?

Now... Let's say, the male wants it and you don't feel like it... does that mean you're homosexual? ....not attracted to males? No... it simply means you made a choice.

Since this is so much fun... let's now imagine your rejected would-be lover ends up at the local bar where he meets a semi-attractive lesbian woman. They get to talking, she has had a fight with her girlfriend and is feeling kind of lonely... they start drinking. Next thing you know, she is sleeping with him. Does that make her bisexual and no longer homosexual? Or did she just make a choice?

And the guy, after making passionate love to the lesbian, confesses to her... He doesn't know why he keeps sleeping with women, he is actually attracted to men! ...Is he homo or hetero? She's a lesbian, maybe he's bi? .....Choices! People make choices, dear.

You are talking about sex and not sexual attraction. Don't you realize that sexual attraction doesn't lead to sex all the time? No, I do not choose who I am sexually attracted to. I've known some very handsome men who were not at all sexually attractive to me.

Also, you CAN have sex with someone you aren't sexually attracted to. Prostitutes do it all the time.

 

[ChrisL]

Ok, they chose their relationships - opposite sex or same sex - because they can. I'm jealous! So many more possibilities for sexual fulfillment ! But, "Can can swing from hetero to "gay" at will?? Do you think that represents a change in sexual orientation , or sexual behavior? Do you understand the difference?

Just when we're making progress -- you blow out a critical noun with "Can can swing from hetero to gay at will"?
I guess that's a critical critical if we knew who can can was !!

Kinda hard to find a "biological marker" for the ability to CHOOSE something? Isn't it?

It's a developing science that has begun to understand why some people are predisposed if not compelled to be gay or bisexual. Hard but not impossible . Again, what is the point of all of this-why does it matter?

I don't KNOW why it matters. There's an agenda here somewheres. The LGBTQ community does NOT want it to be "choice", because then all their opposition will be trying to cure them. And someone doesn't really want it to be biologically predisposed. Maybe again, the gay comm. because it will be looked on as a deficit and possibly lead to pre-natal selection.

I just get angry when folks think THEY KNOW -- it's all one way or the other.

I KNOW there are biological reasons for a LOT of the trans folks. Not all. But there are MEDICALLY legitimate cases for sex ambiguities. And I KNOW that some folks are biologically soundly male or female but have definite physical and personality traits of the other sex.

I also KNOW (with the chart from GLAAD below) that BISEXUALS are the MAJORITY of the LGBTQ community.

And for Bisexuals, I don't think there's any biological evidence at all. Seems to me, it's a choice based on experience and fulfillment..

Do you choose to be sexually attracted to women? Could you be sexually attracted to a man if you "chose" to?

 

[ChrisL]

Maybe they just don't make such distinctions. They are sexually attracted to just certain people regardless of the gender.

If sexual compatibility and fulfillment wasn't an important of relationships --- you'd have something there. But it IS. Which means that Bi's can choose partners based on hetero/homo choice. And their "lives" as either are no different from folks that are strictly one or t'other.

I think you miss my point. I'm saying maybe bisexuals are capable of having sexual compatibility and fulfillment based on "individuals" that they meet rather than the specific gender of the individual. So, they might meet a woman and fall in love or a man because the gender of the individual doesn't play a role for them.

I get that. And that's what's happens. But IT SEEMS that like Bi folk DO consider sexual fulfillment and choice when they make a change in mate. OR keep one "on the side"..

Certainly there ARE biological markers that make men "feminine" and women "masculine". These are well know and display the most in the "trans" sector of the LGBLT sandwich. But majority of "gay" relationships INCLUDING bisexuals are definitely ACTING on choice. Even for the most feminine of women and the most "masculine" of men..

Well, I don't think it's a choice. It's not a choice for me that I'm attracted to men. That's just how it is.

There would be no real expectation for you to choose a women as a better mate. To do that -- you'd have to be ignoring A LOT of social conditioning and intimate details.. HOWEVER -- should you TRY IT and find it AGREEABLE -- you might see it differently. Even WITHOUT your DNA involved.

What are you saying? Let's clear something up, sex and/or enjoying a "stimulating" experience is not the same as sexual attraction. I don't know, maybe it's different for you guys.

 

[Boss]

You are talking about sex and not sexual attraction. Don't you realize that sexual attraction doesn't lead to sex all the time? No, I do not choose who I am sexually attracted to. I've known some very handsome men who were not at all sexually attractive to me.

Also, you CAN have sex with someone you aren't sexually attracted to. Prostitutes do it all the time.

Exactly! So whoever or whatever you are sexually attracted to is one thing and your actual sexual behavior is another thing. So what is "homosexual"? Genetics or Choice? Clearly, the sexual attraction (desire) is genetics and the sexual behavior (the act) is a choice.

 

[ChrisL]

You are talking about sex and not sexual attraction. Don't you realize that sexual attraction doesn't lead to sex all the time? No, I do not choose who I am sexually attracted to. I've known some very handsome men who were not at all sexually attractive to me.

Also, you CAN have sex with someone you aren't sexually attracted to. Prostitutes do it all the time.

Exactly! So whoever or whatever you are sexually attracted to is one thing and your actual sexual behavior is another thing. So what is "homosexual"? Genetics or Choice? Clearly, the sexual attraction (desire) is genetics and the sexual behavior (the act) is a choice.

The thread title doesn't say that. It says "homosexuality." If you are sexually attracted exclusively to men, then you are a homosexual. If you sexually attracted exclusively to women, you are a heterosexual; and if you are sexually attracted to both sexes, you are bisexual.

So? Sex ACTS are a choice, but who you are attracted to is NOT a choice and this is what we've been arguing about since the beginning!

 

[Boss]

The thread title doesn't say that. It says "homosexuality." If you are sexually attracted exclusively to men, then you are a homosexual. If you sexually attracted exclusively to women, you are a heterosexual; and if you are sexually attracted to both sexes, you are bisexual.

So? Sex ACTS are a choice, but who you are attracted to is NOT a choice and this is what we've been arguing about since the beginning!

And I disagree. Unless you ACT on your homosexual attraction, you're not a homosexual... you're just someone who has a homosexual attraction. It's your CHOICES that make you what you are... a heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual. You can have any kind of attraction... it doesn't mean that's what you are. It's just choices you make and it may or may not be indicative of what you're attracted to.

 

[ChrisL]

The thread title doesn't say that. It says "homosexuality." If you are sexually attracted exclusively to men, then you are a homosexual. If you sexually attracted exclusively to women, you are a heterosexual; and if you are sexually attracted to both sexes, you are bisexual.

So? Sex ACTS are a choice, but who you are attracted to is NOT a choice and this is what we've been arguing about since the beginning!

And I disagree. Unless you ACT on your homosexual attraction, you're not a homosexual... you're just someone who has a homosexual attraction. It's your CHOICES that make you what you are... a heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual. You can have any kind of attraction... it doesn't mean that's what you are. It's just choices you make and it may or may not be indicative of what you're attracted to.

Oh bull. You are so full of it. If you are exclusively sexually attracted to men then you ARE a homosexual. Just because you don't act upon it doesn't take away the "nature." Such as, if you were celibate, does that suddenly make you no longer a heterosexual? Of course it doesn't. If you are a man and masturbating to gay porn, then you are gay because that is what turns you on.

 

[rdean]

Some things don't require research.

If you look at a beautiful woman's body and want to touch here and there and you are a man, you're straight.

If you look at a naked man and are fascinated and want to "touch" and more, and you are a man, you're gay.

It's not something that can be learned. It just "is". Like breathing. Something very few forget how to do and no one really has to spend much time learning.

Consider this a "teaching moment".

??? Say what?

Where is the sense in the lines you've presented above. For example, I suppose when one sees a cat or dog and wants to pet it, touching it here and there, one is neither homosexual nor heterosexual? WTH? It may be convenient to oversimplify, but in this thread where one of the rules is "all arguments must be substantiated by citing credible and scientific sources," I'm just dying to see the science behind the arguments you've presented above.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not ragging on you personally; my remarks pertain to your conditional claims, in large part because your arguments are presented entirely as such. Also, I can tell you have an open-minded view toward homosexuals. That's great. But the thread isn't about what one's views are; it's about whether sexual orientation is genetic or a matter of choice.

A couple logical inferences one can validly draw from your arguments:

• For a straight man, a woman needs to be beautiful for one to want to "touch here and there."
• For a gay man, the mere presence of a naked man (apparently animate or not) inspires the desire to "touch and more."
• "Touching," rather than the sex act or a mental affinity, is the expressed and defining outcome of sexual orientation.

Do you honestly believe that? I certainly do not.

You like to touch animals in a sexual manner. Who cares what you believe? That's not sexuality, it's a fetish.

 

[Boss]

Oh bull. You are so full of it. If you are exclusively sexually attracted to men then you ARE a homosexual. Just because you don't act upon it doesn't take away the "nature." Such as, if you were celibate, does that suddenly make you no longer a heterosexual? Of course it doesn't. If you are a man and masturbating to gay porn, then you are gay because that is what turns you on.

Nope... I disagree. You can have words like "gay" mean all kinds of things that have nothing to do with sexuality. I can be a perfectly heterosexual male and act gay.

I think you are trying desperately to put people in little boxes so all is nice and neat. Homo/gays go in their box... they are always exclusively attracted to same gender... turned on by the same things... I don't believe people are that way.... it may be nice to think of a cookie-cutter world where everyone can be so easily defined but that's not reality.

And this is nothing personal towards you, it might be that you simply lack the depth and perspective to grasp what I'm talking about here. You see things as black and white... gay or straight.. homo or hetero... you can't comprehend that people are a mixture of things. Their tendencies lead to choices and those choices define them.

Someone can have an attraction to same gender and choose to never act on it... they are not homosexual. They can marry opposite gender and have a family, live years and years as a normal heterosexual. It's their choice. It's only when they make a choice and ACT on their attraction they actually become homosexual.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Ok, they chose their relationships - opposite sex or same sex - because they can. I'm jealous! So many more possibilities for sexual fulfillment ! But, "Can can swing from hetero to "gay" at will?? Do you think that represents a change in sexual orientation , or sexual behavior? Do you understand the difference?

Just when we're making progress -- you blow out a critical noun with "Can can swing from hetero to gay at will"?
I guess that's a critical critical if we knew who can can was !!

Kinda hard to find a "biological marker" for the ability to CHOOSE something? Isn't it?

It's a developing science that has begun to understand why some people are predisposed if not compelled to be gay or bisexual. Hard but not impossible . Again, what is the point of all of this-why does it matter?

I don't KNOW why it matters. There's an agenda here somewheres. The LGBTQ community does NOT want it to be "choice", because then all their opposition will be trying to cure them. And someone doesn't really want it to be biologically predisposed. Maybe again, the gay comm. because it will be looked on as a deficit and possibly lead to pre-natal selection.

I just get angry when folks think THEY KNOW -- it's all one way or the other.

I KNOW there are biological reasons for a LOT of the trans folks. Not all. But there are MEDICALLY legitimate cases for sex ambiguities. And I KNOW that some folks are biologically soundly male or female but have definite physical and personality traits of the other sex.

I also KNOW (with the chart from GLAAD below) that BISEXUALS are the MAJORITY of the LGBTQ community.

And for Bisexuals, I don't think there's any biological evidence at all. Seems to me, it's a choice based on experience and fulfillment..

Just when we’re making progress, you revert to

Palinesk word salad : Just when we're making progress -- you blow out a critical noun with "Can can swing from hetero to gay at will"?
I guess that's a critical critical if we knew who can can was !!

Those were your words if you recall.

So you believe that there is an agenda on the part of gay people to establish that homosexuality is not a choice? I don’t see that. I don’t see gay people beating that drum. They don’t really need to. As I’ve said before, gays have won many rights and while they have a way to go, will continue to make progress. Legally it is a non-issue, and the public support continues to grow, all without a “gay gene.

I really don’t think that there is any wide spread obsessing among gays and their advocates about fear of trying to be cured, or pre-natal intervention if it should be established as biological. Socially and politically we are way beyond that, and medically, we are nowhere close to being able to “nip it in the bud”

What I do hear is a chorus of anti-gay rhetoric insisting that it is a choice in order to portray homosexuals as frivolous pleasure seekers who are not to be taken seriously and not deserving of equal rights.

I also get angry when folks think they know -- it's all one way or the other. We agree on that. Sexual orientation is the result of “nature and nurture, but that would have to also include bi-sexuality and that seems to be where we disagree. Sexual orientation is generally seen as existing along a continuum from hetero to homosexuality with bisexuality in between. Therefore, it is logical that whatever influences hetero and homosexuality also applies to bisexuality. With bisexuality- the choice is which gender to engage with at any particular time- not the orientation.

So now you are throwing transgender and intersexuality into the mix? You are getting into some very deep and muddied waters there. While on one level, those issues are considered distinct from one another as well as from sexual orientation, we know that they can also be related. For instance, some transgender people are homosexual and some are heterosexual. While transgender is generally considered a psychological issue, I have head trans people- as you point out- say that they are sure that there is a biological involvement. It’s all quite complicated and not well understood.

So where does all of this leave us?? Damned if I know.