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.
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
Mecanophilia is also not a conscious choice. It does not mean that a person is born sexually attracted to cars. Or are you claiming a man born in 1509 was born with a sexual attraction to a 1960 Ford Mustang that was not even invented yet?
Man who gets aroused seeing a shoe?
Just because it's not a conscious choice does not make it "born that way".
With that said, I have known more than a few women who decided men were not worth the hassle and chose to be lesbian from then on out.
Oh my a fetish and something you claim some women you knew said or decided. NOPE.
Fetish? Being gay is a fetish if that is. They are sexually attracted to cars. Just like a gay man is attracted to another man. Just because YOU want there to be a difference does not mean there actually is.
You can say NOPE all you want, but I am not talking just 1 woman, I am talking several who were sexually attracted to men all their life and just got tired of cheating/abuse and decided to only date women, and had ZERO interest in women prior.
So you say that I am a straight woman attracted to straight males is merely a fetish? Like people who are sexually turned on by shoes? You are deluded.
originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: OccamsRazor04 I stopped reading at 'not smart enough'
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: OccamsRazor04 I stopped reading at 'not smart enough'
Probably a good idea, the rest of it contained ideas most likely far too complex for someone who wants to dumb sexual orientation/arousal down to "born that way".
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
Mecanophilia is also not a conscious choice. It does not mean that a person is born sexually attracted to cars. Or are you claiming a man born in 1509 was born with a sexual attraction to a 1960 Ford Mustang that was not even invented yet?
Man who gets aroused seeing a shoe?
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: OccamsRazor04 I stopped reading at 'not smart enough'
Probably a good idea, the rest of it contained ideas most likely far too complex for someone who wants to dumb sexual orientation/arousal down to "born that way".
Sexual orientation includes nature vs. nurture. The point of t his thread is quite simple, though. You should go back to the OP.
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: OccamsRazor04 I stopped reading at 'not smart enough'
Probably a good idea, the rest of it contained ideas most likely far too complex for someone who wants to dumb sexual orientation/arousal down to "born that way".
Sexual orientation includes nature vs. nurture. The point of t his thread is quite simple, though. You should go back to the OP.
The point of discourse is to move forward, not backwards. Why would I go back to something I already addressed?
"Choice" or "born that way" is the old Nature OR nurture debate. It's a stupid debate. The real debate is the interaction between nature AND nurture.
originally posted by: ConfederateZombie
a reply to: caladonea
Yes like an utopia! We will ride unicorns and...............