It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

homosexuality not genetic

page: 5
3
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2009 @ 04:06 PM
link   
My apologies to anyone I who found my above post offensive.
Now let's try reposting it after some minor deletions:

First some groups of people who worship a book they say is God's Word, (or at least they worship the verses in it that justify their behaviour,) convince their societies that gayness is evil, leaving gay people having to defend themselves by pointing out they have no choice, they were born that way.

Then having attended religious schools which teach them nothing and leave them believing they know everything, they try to prove with their hilarious misunderstanding of genetics that gays can't be born the way they are.

Firstly, there are ways to be born with a condition without inheriting it genetically. The hormones produced in the womb, for example, can have a permanent effect on the child.

Secondly, you can be born with a genome you didn't inherit. Klinefelter's Syndrome is one of these. My son has this. He's XXXY/XXXXY, a very rare variant. However the genes of his parents and siblings are normal. On an average, about 36 people are born with this each day, despite the fact that almost all people born with Klinefelter's are sterile.

Third misconception here: a genetically inherited condition that is not passed on will die out. It is possible for a pool of a recessive gene to survive in a community, even if the people who inherit 2 of that gene never procreate, if that gene confers a survival or reproductive advantage on the whole community. The presence of gay people in the community could do this. Having young adults who did not reproduce may have meant there were more people to guard the children and keep them safe, it may have meant others in the community could reproduce more, it may have meant that there were people who, as they were not looking after children, had more energy to plan for the community's welfare, and help the group adapt to changing conditions.

Perhaps we would still be swinging from leafy boughs if ancient gays had not visualised pretty houses with cultivated food, and guided their peers along that path.

Fourth misconception here is that one gene regulates one feature.
No, genetics is much more complex than that. Groups of genes combine to have certain effects, and some genes can be switched off or on. Some aspects of genetics are still not understood.

However the fact that gay people tend to be born that way should not even need to be stated. Whether I'm having a loving, sexual relationship with a consenting adult male or a consenting adult female, and whether that is from unchangeable inborn imperative or by choice, is nobody's business but my own.

Only bigots would want to interfere with with the love lives of people who are hurting no-one.

Please try to keep your Bible or Koran out of my bedroom, and I'll try to restrain any urge to munch the carpet in your church or mosque.




posted on May, 6 2009 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by scobro
 




My theory is ,that gay men were supposed to be born female,and gay women were supposed to be born male.


I think your theory needs a bit more consideration. It doesn't address the issue of gender identity disorders, which is a whole different scenario even if we culturally associate them with homosexuality.

The fundamental differences between Male and Female are more than just their reproductive organs. There's a wide spectrum of behavioral patterns and tendencies which are hardwired into your brain at birth... some of them associated with males, some to female... but it's only a rough draft for who that person will be. As the brain grows and learns from it's environment, it modifies those behaviors. Most of the time it picks up societal stereotypes associated with it's predisposition, but not always and in different intensities across individuals.

Sometimes this predisposition develops a female-like mind in a male body, or vice versa. Sometimes it's only a few behavioral traits males get, and in different collections of intensities.

This may help to explain why there are VERY large differences in the psychological profiles between an openly gay man who is proud of being a gay MAN, compared to a man who is attracted other men but identifies themselves as a woman so strongly that they take steps to actively alter their bodies through surgery and medication.

There's even male transsexual lesbians, and female transexual homosexuals. It REALLY does seem to indicate that the two are separate phenomena, which we have already determined and diagnosed.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by scobro
My theory is ,that gay men were supposed to be born female,and gay women were supposed to be born male.

Some sort of mix up occurs during early development in the womb.

Thats what i think anyway.


I agree to a point. Since we all start out as female then it is logical that a delay in the transformation to male could account for why we have a woman trapped in a man's body situation.

But for females I really see it more of a psychological event since they start female and end up female.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrwupy
To be perfectly honest, It doesn't matter whether it's genetic or a choice. They have a right to live the life they want to live.

It's guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States. Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

If they decide to be gay, what business is that of yours?

They have a right to live their life the way they choose, regardless of the reason they have chosen to be as they are. (or were born that way.)

I think the world would be a better place if we spent more time trying to make ourselves a better person, and less time trying to tear everyone else down.

If someone is gay, they have a right to be gay.

It's not our place to pass judgement on them.
Just my thoughts,

wupy


This comment was not necessary at all. No one in this thread was passing a normative value judgment until you came along. We're talking about evolution, survival and genetic replication. Within certain rational parameters, the assumptions made by the OP are perfectly reasonable. Let's try to actually argue the point. Thank you, good moderator, sir, you provided the wick that will now surely catch fire and burn...

In terms of its societal implications, we know that as humans we will fare quite nicely without the existence of a perfect proportion of sexually interested males and females. In a large civilization, much of the naturally selective pressures, which are concerned with maximizing reproductive success have been dissolved. We aren't going to fail because some people aren't "following the rules". At some point in the future, biological sexuality might be as inadequate a difference as some vestigial organs in our body, though these seemingly redundant characteristics will definitely retain some rather important social and cultural functions that we could just not do without. Homosexuality is not a problem.

[edit on 6-5-2009 by cognoscente]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by HulaAnglers
 


Then how does that explain the FACT the vast, and I mean VAST majority of pedophiles are white heterosexual males?

You’re speaking from pure prejudice, ignorance and hate.
And don’t come back and ask me to *prove it*.

I’m not going to spoon feed your lack of knowledge - because you know what, I have a sneaking feeling you could have all the facts served up to you on a silver platter and you’d still choose a meal of ignorance.

*************************************************************

IMO sexual preference in humans has no baring on evolution of humans as a species because we're not animals - meaning - we can control our population - or not - at will.



Wow I simply shared testimonies from very gay people who confided in me, I think they would be upset at your denial of their experience!

Pedophiles corrupt youth for life and most are trisexual. What about all those priests?

But since I am being accused of judging, I will take a look at homosexual's practices, like anal sex and fisting and scoring as many times as possible in one day! Lets face it the sexual fixation is really getting boring - sexual addiction is a disease! Dressing up like women...and despising women...

There now you can get all angry about something real and intended on my part.

Anyway, I can't stand my gay friends anymore they are always the first ones to loose it, whenever their fake world is threatened - just don't need the drama or the burden. ATS has certainly helped me take a stance on this issue. These gay threads are quite revealing.










[edit on 6-5-2009 by HulaAnglers]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Welfhard
 




The study I saw said that the bonobos were 100% bisexual.


It would depend on the criteria of the study. Remember that sex for Bonobos is a highly integral part of their bonding and social structure, and they rely on their family groups for protection and survival. Even if a Bonobo were exclusively homosexual, there's the possibility that they'd show interest in a female purely as a social gesture.

Now, consider a culture in humanity where your very life depends on your heterosexuality. If you don't find females attractive, you're going to have to learn how to put on a show. So we could study a population of say, Iranians, for 20 years and report that there are no exclusively homosexual men or women in Iran. And this would be utterly and completely false.

Different pressures, same idea. Unfortunately bonobos don't form high-population societies due to instinct and population levels... but it would be interesting to see if whether or not within large stationary settlements of bonobo chimps some choose to mate exclusively with members of the same sex, show much higher preference and frequency to same sex partners, or continue at the same ratio due to social pressures.

I personally doubt the 100% assessment of bi-sexuality simply for the reasons stated above in addition to the incredible similarities in brain structure, operation, and development our two species. Remember that irreducible complexity is wrong - because traits and behaviors beneficial for one purpose can be applied to other purposes. It's possible that evidence could exist across multiple flowering lines of descent that suggests a common ancestor who's appearance happened at the time a new brain structure was forming, or when tetrapod life emerged on land, which would give us a better understanding of our evolution as well as the original purpose or fundamental cause for what we see today.

I'm kind of interested now... I'll have to see if there's been any studies done on, or special consideration given to, sexual behaviors across the various currently existing clades or taxonomic groups which would indicate an origin to it? Is homosexuality a mammalian phenomena? Does it manifest in reptiles and birds as well?

[edit on 6-5-2009 by Lasheic]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 08:11 PM
link   
For reptiles, I know that garter snakes dispaly homosexual activity. Male garter snakes will emit female phermones and hide by a female's burrow. When another male garter snake comes along, they may mate. This makes the other male garter snake think that it has already mated. So, it has a purpose in the evolutionary fitness scheme.

Side note: One of the craziest thing to come across when strolling through the woods is a garter snake orgy.

Birds. Lots of birds have homosexual behavior.

Actually, any social animal has been known to display homosexual behavior.

Ask for some links or references and I will dig some up. I am just drawing this info from memory.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by constantwonder
 


Simple answer to this, please explain homosexual behavior in other animals. It does occur frequently. Some monkeys even use it as a form of social bonding and it helps them form a heirachy. If there is a gay gene maybe it just remains dormant and pop up in certain people. Maybe you need two parents who carry the gene but only have one copy each and therefore themselvse aren't gay.

Basically you're talking nonsense, with a poor understanding of evolution, enjoy ignorance.

[edit on 6-5-2009 by ImaginaryReality1984]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Simple answer to this, please explain homosexual behavior in other animals.


That can be explained away by simple lack of knowledge, or lack of communication, or simple visual mistake.

Can you tell the difference between a male cat and a female cat from a distance? It could be a simple identity mistake.

Maybe monkeys are unaware that only females can reproduce, because of lack of knowledge, and they try anyway. They could probably have a belief system that if it doesn't work it wasn't meant to be, but still think it might work.

What makes you think monkeys don't have mental problems too? Just because monkeys do it, doesn't mean its all "genetic", and it really doesn't mean "its ok to do".

There is YOUR ignorance handed to you.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:39 PM
link   
How about some homosexual fruitflies?

Volume 25, Supplement 1, Pages S2-S271 (1996)
Nineteenth Annual Meeting of the Japan Neuroscience Society
Kobe, Japan
11-13 July 1996




Homosexual courtship in Drosophila is induced by a mutation of the neural sex determination gene fruitless that encodes a novel zinc finger protein with a BTB domain. Daisuke Yamamoto, ERATO, Yamamoto Behavior Genes Project, and Mitsubishi Kasei Institute of Life Sciences, 11 Minamiooya, Machida-shi, Tokyo, 194, Japan.

We have isolated a new Drosophila mutant, satori, males of which do not court or copulate with female flies. The satori mutation comaps with fruitless (fru) at 91B, and does not complement the bisexual phenotype of fru, indicating that sarori is allelic to fru (frusat). The frusat adult males lack a male-speciftc muscle, the muscle of Lawrence, as are the other fru alleles do. Molecular cloning and analyses of the genomic and complementary DNAs indicated that transcription of the fru locus yields several different transcripts. At least one of them is sexually dimorphic at its 5’ terminus and encodes a putative transcription regulator with a BTB domain and two zinc finger motifs. In the 5’ non-coding region, three putative Transformer binding sites are identified in the female transcript but not in the male transcript. The fru gene is expressed in a population of brain cells, including those in the antenna1 lobe, that have been suggested to be involved in determination of sexual orientation. We suggest that fru functions downstream of rro in the sex-determination cascade in some neural cells and that inappropriate sexual development of these cells in the fru mutants results in altered sexual orientation of the fly.

This study was conducted in collaboration with H. Ito, K. Fujitani, K. Usui, K. Shimizu-Nishikawa, and S.
Tanaka.




posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Text Black I have not read all of the post related to whether or not there is a gay gene, but it seems that most people are forgetting that there were societies that openly practiced homosexuality, and were also married such as the Greeks and then later the Romans who conquered them. Also since it was frowned upon in many societies-those who had the gene had to be careful and would still endure the subterfuge of marriage. Then there is the fact that many today don't realize that the are gay until later in life-after they have already procreated-so, it would be easy for the gene to still proliferate through out the course of humanity.
This is a possiblity.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by 0nce 0nce
 


I have no sexual interest in other men, but I am not about to tell someone else what to do.
That said. People called wildlife biologists, who can generally tell the difference between the male and female of an organsim, have observed and documented homosexuality in just about every animal. Except those that produce asexually, that is.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Canis Lupus
 


Yes but its been established that it's NOT due to a gene

...or has it...?


[edit on 6-5-2009 by mostlyspoons]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by tamusan
 


Only a handful of species have been documented to act gay. "Almost all" is a gross exaggeration. I would reckon that the few ones who do are animals that are capable of experiencing pleasure thru intercourse.

I humbly appolgize for my double post. If it really annoys you, merge them together I don't mind


[edit on 6-5-2009 by mostlyspoons]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:01 PM
link   


Yes but its been established that it's NOT due to a gene
reply to post by mostlyspoons
 


Read the Japanese study that I posted above. It established gene based homosexuality. More than 10 years ago.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:17 PM
link   
But, actually, some same-sex birds do do it. So do beetles, sheep, fruit bats, dolphins, and orangutans. Zoologists are discovering that homosexual and bisexual activity is not unknown within the animal kingdom. reply to post by mostlyspoons
 


There is a start for your research. Deny ignorance and research more about homosexual animals. You will find that it is far more than a handful that have been observed engaging in homosexual behavior.

I have personally seen more than a handful of different species engaged in this behavior.

Does this evidence make it right or wrong? Does this evidence make it genetic or environmental? I do not know and I also do not care.

However, read the post I made earlier about the fruit flies. It show that homosexual behavior can be genetic. Is it all? Time will tell.



[edit on 6-5-2009 by tamusan]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by HulaAnglers
Wow I simply shared testimonies from very gay people who confided in me, I think they would be upset at your denial of their experience!

Pedophiles corrupt youth for life and most are trisexual. What about all those priests?

But since I am being accused of judging, I will take a look at homosexual's practices, like anal sex and fisting and scoring as many times as possible in one day! Lets face it the sexual fixation is really getting boring - sexual addiction is a disease! Dressing up like women...and despising women...

There now you can get all angry about something real and intended on my part.

Anyway, I can't stand my gay friends anymore they are always the first ones to loose it, whenever their fake world is threatened - just don't need the drama or the burden. ATS has certainly helped me take a stance on this issue. These gay threads are quite revealing.


That post is so bitchy that if I subscribed to stereotypes I'd believe you were gay.
However your lack of knowledge of the subject proves you can't be.

Few of the guys I know who were abused by priests are gay, and the ones that are believe they were gay before then.
None of the gay people I know were abused as children.

Most of the anal sex and fisting videos on the net are of heterosexual couples, and none of the men I've known who are out to score as much as possible are gay.

Few gay guys despise women, and at least those that do keep away from us. It's the heterosexuals who despise women and abuse and rape them who are the big problem. How many women are murdered by gays each year?

And as for suggesting gay guys dress up in women's clothes ...
Darling, they're not gays, they're trannies. That's quite different.
And I've known two male trannies who have loving sexual relationships with their wives. These women were turned on by seeing their husbands gallivanting around in gowns.

There's room for incredible variety on this blue pearl of a planet.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:23 PM
link   
I thought that I read somewhere that its most likely not genes but hormones that the women makes during birth that determines if the child will be gay or not. There is still so much to learn about hormones about many things that makes a person not just genes alone. Maybe someday science will better understand it. In the meantime, I would suggest that we all get along with each other and not blame anyone for anything that is different to the so called normal people if that ever exists at all. You are what you are. We should not have to think like they did ages gone pass but work to the future. We all have something to contribute to society as a whole.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:52 PM
link   
Perhaps one can carry the "gay gene" as a recessive trait. That would enable it to be passed on to the next generation. The gene, if it exists, would probably only increase one's chances of being homosexual rather than causing homosexuality.

There's been a lot of talk recently of the possibility of an "autistic gene." This gene would only increase the odds of being autistic, not guarantee it.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 01:25 AM
link   
No, homosexuality isn't genetic, but it's also not a choice either.

It's something you realise once your hormones begin to set.

I cannot chose to be sexually attracted to the same sex any more than a homosexual can chose to be sexually attracted to the opposite sex.

And no, before any of you try to make a half-baked argument, I'm not talking about bi-sexuals.


You're attracted to who your attracted to. It's not an option.
I cannot look at a man and say, I should be attracted to that, and *poof* become sexually attracted to him.

It's not a choice.


But hey, if you think gays should try to force themselves to be straight... I'd like to see you try to force yourself to be gay.

Just... post it on youtube will you?
I want to laugh at it.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join