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.

 

Gays identified 80% of the time within a blink of an eye without hair, jewelry

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by murphy22
 


Please don't place Homosexuality with Mental Disorder.

go to a 'Straight Club' watch the Straight Men grope the Females. if he did place his hand down his pants it is sexual harassment, not a "Mental Disorder"




posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 09:28 PM
link   

tothetenthpower
This proves ( not definitively of course) that biologically there are markers for us to identify homosexuality.

Which means on some level, sexual orientation is biological.

~Tenth


So when I'm attracted to a woman and not just observing then there is a biological sign? I thought it would be behavior or psychological.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 09:29 PM
link   
Dudes at first I really thought he was just horsing around, you know just bein dumb but then his hand went inside instead of just snapping my elastic back in place.

I'm civil, not just reactive to anything. Well, maybe a life or death situation. As for married dudes, I just don't understand it, I guess there's still alot of closet cases even these days, and I've mention the married dudes thing in another thread.. forgot which one but I'll link it if I remember.

Is there a perv face? Doubt it, as that behavioral not orientation. But BI, where does that fall? Does the face look inbetween a straight face and gay face? Most BIs i've bumped into seem more masc than straights imo
edit on 28-1-2014 by gardener because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


If homosexuality were biological, identical twins would be homosexual greater than 50% of the time being genetically identical like they are and being nurtured in the same uterine environment like they are.

Instead, the highest correlation of sexual orientation in identical twins us somewhere in the 17% range arguing for a large component of nurture.

Mind, that doesn't mean you consciously choose your orientation, but it does mean that you aren't even close to 100% born that way. So while there can be some biological factors that might help nudge your sexuality, they are not going to make you one way or the other; influences after your birth do that.

People are talking about testosterone exposure? Well, it's pretty obvious from my characteristics (finger length among others; my ring finger is a good quarter inch at least longer than my index finger) that I was exposed to high amount of testosterone for a girl. I was a major tomboy, always preferred the company of guys for my leisure pursuits and turned into a damn fine athlete, but I never had any ambiguity about my orientation. However, if testosterone exposure were key, I'd have turned out lesbian.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 09:33 PM
link   

ketsuko
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


If homosexuality were biological, identical twins would be homosexual greater than 50% of the time being genetically identical like they are and being nurtured in the same uterine environment like they are.



Why confuse genetic with biological?

Smoking statistically increases homosexual progeny. Likewise, first pregnancies produce more homosexual progeny too.

Definitely seems to have a stress/testosterone-reducing element to it, which is biological, environmental not in these instances, simply genetic.


(post by murphy22 removed for a manners violation)

posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Darth_Prime
reply to post by murphy22
 


Please don't place Homosexuality with Mental Disorder.

go to a 'Straight Club' watch the Straight Men grope the Females. if he did place his hand down his pants it is sexual harassment, not a "Mental Disorder"


I agree with your general statement. That said, people must have tolerance for those that can not fully understand the "condition" as well. Unless you go completely out of your way to grasp the entire situation, there is absolutely no possible way a straight person can relate to the way a homosexual person feels. I myself have had an ever evolving opinion about the entire situation the more I researched and studied the matter.

I believe more than anything else that all people are equal and all people deserve to be treated as individuals and with respect but I also understand the complex structure that fuels our society in the way of human nature and the opinions and views can not just be discounted with a couple of condescending or lecture filled sentences.

For many, including myself, the belief that homosexuality is a psychological condition is the predominant belief. The human brain is incredibly complex and having been married to a women who was extremely sick with bi-polar disorder I have seen first hand the effects of chemical imbalance within the brain and also the outcome of the appropriate medication. The results were night and day and resulted in a completely different person.

I am not saying by any means that homosexuality is a disease, a sickness or that there is something "wrong" with those that are homosexual but what I am saying is that biologically, it doesn't make sense and for that reason and that reason alone, it at least seems to me to be something that is processed in the brain and not in the body itself.
edit on 28-1-2014 by Helious because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 09:38 PM
link   
reply to post by gardener
 


BS!



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by gardener
 


Ah, OK. I get where that was going now. Sorry, still a bit bleary after a headache.

A lot of times when people argue this they use biology and genetics interchangeably.

If that wasn't the case, I was confused and I apologize.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by gardener
 


Where the hell do you live? Both here, and NY, that kind of behavior would likely get you put in a coma at best....
edit on Tue, 28 Jan 2014 21:45:49 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 


Your "logic" dug its own hole... Not going to even try and explain right and wrong to one that has no foundation for understanding the difference. It's a mental illness. Help is out there.

edit on 28-1-2014 by murphy22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Helious
 


Well, I can make one case for it biologically where it would make sense.

If there are in fact, gay genes then it is absolutely correct that the strict expression of homosexuality makes no sense because those genes aren't going anywhere. They are inimical to themselves.

However, if they are recessive genes and a complex of genes, then it could be that possessing one copy of them is somehow advantageous. I am thinking of situations like possessing one copy of the gene for sickle cell or cystic fibrosis being a good thing, but getting two copies of the recessive winds up giving you something deadly. If that were to prove to be the case, then it would be advantageous for nature to keep those genes around despite what getting two copies does for you.

However, that does not explain the lack of common sexual orientation in identical twins. So, I think that it's unlikely homosexuality is highly genetic.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 10:05 PM
link   

MALBOSIA

tothetenthpower
This proves ( not definitively of course) that biologically there are markers for us to identify homosexuality.

Which means on some level, sexual orientation is biological.

~Tenth


So when I'm attracted to a woman and not just observing then there is a biological sign? I thought it would be behavior or psychological.


For me, it's usually six shots of tequilla.

Seriously, though, who does a study like this? Who wakes up one morning and says:

"Gee, what to do today? Find a cure for cancer? Develop a more fuel effcient car? Maybe find a way to recycle that plastic island in the Pacific. Wait, I got it! I'll see if people can tell if someone is gay by looking at them. That's what the world really needs right now."



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 11:00 PM
link   

murphy22
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 


Your "logic" dug its own hole... Not going to even try and explain right and wrong to one that has no foundation for understanding the difference. It's a mental illness. Help is out there.

edit on 28-1-2014 by murphy22 because: (no reason given)


Could you possibly describe how you know it's a mental illness or, failing that, throw up a link to information regarding its known status as a mental illness and the cure rate for the people who provide the "help that is out there" part?



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Helious
 


Yes, i understand it may be difficult for people to "Understand" Homosexuals if they are Straight, and you can debate on if it's genetic or biological, or if it's a choice or not, if we are born this way or decide we want to be Gay, or if it's the "Gay FAce" or eyebrows, or our hair, or our clothes etc but saying i have a "Mental Disorder' is a blatant ignorant attack on me personally, does that person have the "Right" to say it and believe it, yes sure they do, and i would be the first to say it.

Getting Stars on message boards for calling people Mentally Disordered because they are Gay says wonders about the world



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by murphy22
 


Your Tone seems very pointed right now, but i gave you a star anyway.. why not, i have a "Mental Disorder" might as well give you a Star!


There was an article on scientificamerican.com, but i believe it's been taken off?



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 11:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Helious
 


I have seen nothing to suggest that homosexuality is something carried inherently in genes.

Well there was some pretty interesting findings in twin studies.

Homosexual Orientaiton in Twins: A Report on 61 Pairs and Three Triplets.


Both the Bailey and Pillard study and the present study are in general agreement about rates for concordance of sexual orientation in MZ and DZ twins. In both studies the rates of concordance for MZ twins are sufficiently high as to suggest a strong biological basis for sexual orientation. The rate of concordance for both MZ and DZ twins is considerably higher than might be expected by chance.


reply to post by ketsuko
 



However, that does not explain the lack of common sexual orientation in identical twins.

^
edit on 28-1-2014 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by gardener
 


OP.

The link to the study in that article gives this:

"Sorry, the article that you've requested cannot be found"

Have another source.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


Seems to be working here with chrome. Although loaded pretty slow. Maybe ATS traffic is overloading the server lol.
edit on Tue, 28 Jan 2014 23:33:08 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by murphy22
 


It's a mental illness. Help is out there.

Mental illness according to you or professional medical organizations that officially determine these things?

The American Psychological Assosciation doesn't seem to agree.

Or according to The Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy.

As with masturbation, homosexuality, once considered abnormal by the medical profession, has not been considered a disorder for more than three decades.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join