/sci/ - Science & Math

Sometimes people just make bad choices, its just free will you can't always explain it.

hypothalamus

Texan here, fuck faggots.

If they had no dad, they become gay for extra attention because they never had a dad to give them attention.

>>4879996
free will what... there is no choice

Superior genes cause homosexuality. Straight people are deficient mutants.

>>4880001
>fuck faggots
You do realize that would make you a faggot.

>>4880001
But I have a dad... stop your nonsense assumption

Anyone claiming to have a simple answer is a fucking idiot. Nobody knows. All we can say is that there are probably many subtle reasons, and that it's at least partially biology.

>>4880010
then you have no friends and you became gay for attention,same concept

>>4879996
I don't think you can really "Choose" your Sexuality either. You find some things attractive. You don't find other things attractive.

Is it that hard to realize sexual orientation is a subjective matter?
>refraining from posting furry art
Anyone is capable of being homosexual, either through rationalization or mental disorder. The two are not mutually exclusive, mind you.

someone post Alfie's Home

>>4880018
I have 4 best straight male friends, and some other best female friends, sorry, I don't understand your logic.

>>4880032
>has more than 4 "best" friends
then you became gay because you don't understand the meaning of the superlative

>>4879996
>>4880001
>>4880018
>>4880024

Closetfags detected.

Just follow your heart, guys, you'll be happier in the long run.

>>4880032

then youre mentally ill

and i hope you know your 4 straight male friends always talk shit about you behind your back (thats the only time theyll be behind you,faggot) I have a gay "friend" and we always talk shit about him and then act nice to his face.

>>4880035
what do you mean by superlative?
what do you meant by "become gay" in the previous post?
You don't know that there are people that wanna kill me in the country if they know that I'm homosexual. My future is doom if they know. There are 80% homophobia here. Why the fuck do I choose to become gay anyway? So I don't fucking know,
Man, if there is a fucking medicine, I would take it. But still, I can't understand your point...

>>4880038
I'm not a closetfag. You didn't even read my post. I can be gay for a furry body but not a hairy simian body, it's plain subjectivity.

>>4880041
lol, I'm sorry, no one know I'm gay.

I don't understand why we're even debating this still. Oh, yes I do. It's because of those FUCKING RELIGIOUS ASSHOLES THAT THINK SOME BOOK WRITTEN THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO HAS THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING.

Fuck right off, fuck whoever you want, and let others do the same. That's all it takes.

>>4880069

>thinks nothing wrong with being gay
>still in the closet because its a known fact queers are disgusting and wrong

>>4880070

Its science bro, being gay spreads disease, science says its wrong.

I really cannot believe this place is called a 'science board'.

>>4880058
the grammatical superlative, so apparently now I know why you really became gay, poor grasp of grammar.

>>4880077
read this shit
>>4880058
yeah right, I am gay but hate being gay, so what, do you have the homosexuality cure?
oh lol, I'm reply to a troll.

I'm outta here, so many trolls, and so many hypocrites that claim themself as /sci/ people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing

>>4880084
Well some posters on this board and ITT aren't ass-backwards retarded. The majority is, during summer at least. That's 4chan for you.

Okay. Let's try to come up with some sort of consensus. Think about some fag you know. what's different about him and straight people? The way I see it, a lot of them actually ARE missing a male role model. It DOES NOT have to be a father, friends work as well. However, maybe, JUST MAYBE, there is a biological point of view we can assume as well.


The point of argument is not to be right, but to find what is.

>>4880118
Fuck you and read >>4880024

>>4879988
> proper
Please define.

I don't really know why people keep insisting it's a choice when virtually every gay person I know has told me at some point that they would never choose to be gay voluntarily.

>>4880118
>>4879988
OP sound really bias, it sounds like he just want someone yell the same opinion with him and "Yeah, I'm right all the way!"
>The way I see it,
I'm sorry, but the way human see thing doesn't prove anything at all, If I see bieber as a lesbian, is he become a lesbian...

>>4880147
Not insisting that here. There are people intellectual enough to choose and there are people who succumb to mental disorder.

>>4880157
>intellectual enough to choose
I don't think "intellect" has anything to do with sexual attraction.
>succumb to mental disorder
Define "mental disorder" without being hopelessly vague or relying on moral or religious abstractions.

>>4880157
How do you know that... is there any specific proofs for that one?

>>4880165
>>4880162
I have no proof for my claim of mental disorder but chemical imbalances could easily be the culprit.

As for choosing to be gay I'm not personally homosexual but I am bisexual because sexual orientation is a matter of preference and rationalization, i.e., I'd take a furry over a sweaty hairy Homo Sapiens. It's subjective like art, I have no disease, I just think a body is a carbon-based collection of molecules and not a catalyst for sin or some shit like that

>>4880154
OP here, I did not samefag there.

The literature says it's sex-atypicality. So, if a man has sex-atypical traits (he played more with girls as a kid, more with dolls than cars) he is more likely to become gay as an adult.

But this is on average true, not in each case. There might be some who are gay even though they weren't obviously sex-atypical. That may be more for cultural reasons than biological.

>>4880213
sorry about that.
>>4880203
I really wonder, If they fully discover the brain, could they easily change people sexual orientation? From homosexual to straight and vice versa?

>>4880228
To change it would mean to either cause a "chemical imbalance" (I don't really know what it is biologically) or to change their memories of insights had like mine.

I believe you're on to something OP. Almost every homosexual I've ever met has been raised by either a single mother, or actually even more commonly (particular the extremely flaming gays) raised by their grandmother. Correlation != causation and all that bullshit but still, doesn't mean there is no connection there.

what causes asexuality?

>>4880223

But that's probably a sign/symptom, not a cause.

Who cares. Less competition.

It's just natures way of balancing the population.

>>4879988

human beings are genetically bisexual. hormonal levels in the womb narrow the sexuality in most people (usually to heterosexual, sometimes to homosexual).

What the hell is /b/ doing on /sci/?

>>4879988
Genetical sink. We're bisexual in nature, pinpointing our sexuality through environmental encounters. However, since our sexuality is materialistic and objectifying, we're never attracted to a gender, but objects or groups of objects. Would you be attracted to a girl if she had a dick? You'd say no, that'd make me gay. So would you be attracted to a girl if she had no genitals or boobs, only female chromosomes? You'd still probably argue she's not a girl.

Homosexuality doesn't exist. Neither does fetishes when you get down to it, it's just a sexual deviation that's both psychological and physical. As for the evolutionary implications: This argument is so broad and elaborate I would never be able to bruise on it in a single post.

>>4880041
>I have a gay "friend" and we always talk shit about him and then act nice to his face.

Wow, you're more of a woman than he is, and he fucks men!

My brothers gay and he had a loving father throughout his life, it was clear at a young age too.

it always boils down to nucleotides

there are probably factors in the womb that trigger an increase in femininity and a prpoortional decrease in masculinity, whatever that may be

but having sequence A instead of B makes one more prone to behavior on the homosexual side of the continuum given environmental contingencies

this yet exists because obviously due to societal pressure homosexuals still have just as many kids as heterosexuals, and homosexuals have brothers are sisters for which they can facilitate kin selection

Bisexual masterrace reporting in

>>4880366
I doubt femininty is what causes it at all.

I think that homosexuality should be considered a fetish, it an abnormal sexual attraction to something that should be non-sexually attractive.

>>4880340
>Would you be attracted to a girl if she had a dick? You'd say no, that'd make me gay

Fuck yes I would, and you won't find more hetero than me. A girl with a dick is so hot

I'm just going to debunk the entire male role model bs... I have a twin brother. I'm gay, and he's straight. We always had our father (both parent's in our lives) and were never sexually abused or abused in anyway whatsoever. Idiots.

Also, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYMjXucTFaM

Let's debunk the stereotypes:
Please, allow me to educate you /sci/. You see, the group of homosexuals is different from many other minorities - you can tell when someone's black/asian/etc. You can't tell when someone's gay. You think you can, but you can’t. It can be explained simply by this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

When you see one of those lisp-speaking, rainbow-wearing, hair-spiking guys, you assume in your head that he's gay. When/if he eventually tells you, you say to yourself, "I knew it all along!" This builds up your confidence in your "gaydar." You assume that being gay means that you follow the stereotype. But when someone who doesn't fit this stereotype admits to being gay, you look back and try to rationalize it. "Well, there was that one time a while back when he wore a pink shirt..." Or when someone who overlaps the stereotype turns out to be straight, you can't deal with your worldview being shattered. You insist, "He's hiding it. He doesn't want anyone to know." Truth is, after you lose contact with him, he might come out. Or he might lead the life of a straight main and get married to a woman. You obviously aren't going to follow up, so you'll subconsciously assume you're right. You've been so accurate so far after all.
1/4

>>4880378
If you were to actually go to a gay bar, you'd see that there's quite a mix, depending on where you go. Are you going to take note of the plethora of "straight acting" gay guys blending in? Nope, you'll keep your eyes on those flaming attentionwhores scattered throughout. "I knew it! This is what the gay scene is! They're all just like them." Except for, you know, the ones who weren't. Not to mention that gay men don't all congregate to gay bars; it's actually usually the attentionwhoring, one-night-standing promiscuous ones that do. So they're bound to be overrepresented notwithstanding.

"But there's at least some truth to every stereotype! The media can still be right." I will not deny that there are giant flamers out there (that also annoy the shit out of other gay guys), but you must understand the media. They give the people what they WANT to see. Unfortunately, most people don't turn on the TV to have their worldviews challenged; they want to relax without thinking. So the media will make it easy; due to the people's confirmation biases, they already think that all gay guys are flamers. Then why not portray EVERY gay character like that? We don't want to cause any disturbances in the minds of our viewers... However, this ends up reinforcing their beliefs even more. Seeing as how the common person's world outlook is influenced a lot by the media, their confirmation bias is now nearly unbreakable. There's no way they can deny it. And the media continues to serve to this...
2/4

>>4880379
The reality is that, unlike other minorities, many gay guys can blend into society very well. In fact, there are plenty of gay men who wish to keep their sex life private like any decent human being. "Then how come I never see these people?" Gee, maybe because they keep it PRIVATE. You don't see them because you don't look for them; you're too busy staring at the flamers on top those idiotic floats. When you see a black man, you'll know he's black. When you see a gay man, you won't know he's gay unless you assume. If he's wearing a suit and tie, you probably never will. And he won't bother to tell you - because it's none of your damn business.

When you complain about gay people "shoving their culture into your face" you're talking about a group within the gay population. You don't see the ones who are respectful and private because they're being exactly that - respectful and private. But no, this can't possibly be. "All gay men are flamers! Just look at the TV!" And now you wish to punish every gay man because you cannot look beyond your own biases, when in reality your own biases are CAUSING the culture to be thrown at your face. The media thinks that this is what the gay man needs to be shown as, because that's how YOU defined him.
3/4

>>4880382
In the end, people will believe that they want. They will see what they want. But I ask that you at least try to look a bit closer, and perhaps be a bit more considerate of those who are trying to be respectful and fit into society without a huge fuss. I won't apologize for flamers, because they're not with me. They're not my "allies" or one of my "kind." To me, they're annoying, and wish they didn't make all gay guys look bad. But perhaps if more people would realize that they aren't everyone, that they aren't the requirement to be gay, then maybe we can work towards building a functioning society without petty discrimination laws.
4/4

>>4880384
Thank you for killing the thread.

>>4880018
>then you have no friends and you became gay for attention, same concept
If that's the case (and I'm not the guy he's talking about) then that's the last kind of attention I could possibly want. I've known I was gay since I was 10 or so, and 9 years later I'm still in the closet. The average gay person knows they're by 12 or so, so why do they wait years to ever tell anybody? Your theory makes no sense.

Also, if it's true absent father makes children homosexual, we'd expect see more black gay people than black people in the general population, which we don't, besides the other tests of this hypothesis. Eh: http://i.imgur.com/XRCkD.png
It is generally true that gay men are closer to their mother than to their father, however this link may not be causal; I wouldn't think it is.

Someone from /hm/, /g/ here.

I was raised by one of those military fathers and I turned out gay. My parents never separated, I was never abused, etc; I grew up having a pretty normal life.
My partner also had a pretty similar life, except he grew up rather far from me. We both knew from a young age, as far as we can remember, that we are gay.

There was no apparent 'nurture' cause; it was nature.

also,
> Freud
> 2012
I shiggy diggy

>>4880438
>Eh: http://i.imgur.com/XRCkD.png

You do realised this is an image board, don't you?

>>4880455
Thank you

>>4880455

Hory shit, thats incredible

you guys at /sci/ gotta work on troll-spotting. this is insane

>>4880455
I fucking love it.

A better question: homosexuality is a cause for what?

A: Sucking dicks, anal orgasms, sexual joy, happiness.

No problem with that. Stay gay, faggots! I support you.

Same thing that causes anything else; genetic vulnerability (or capability if you really want to nitpick semantics) coupled with environmental reinforcement means you yield the genetic adaptation.

Muthafucka.

Pic is entirely unrelated.

>>4880280
Lack of hormones

>>4880203
>bisexual
closetfag detected.

What causes some men to be into chubbies? I've always thought guys who are into chubbie women are those who have fat sisters, but someone on /sci/ told me this was bullshit.

It's hereditary.

/thread

What causes men to be straight? I've always thought it was guys with no motherly influence in there life, but someone on /sci/ said this was bullshit.

Like, I have no mom, so now I need to bang alot of women to make up for my lack of a motherly figure in my life.

Does anyone know the homosexuality rates by race?

>>4880570
I've always thought that Guys who are into Chubbies do indeed have lives which were heavily impacted upon by a fat female. I know, I see the pun potential.

Freud was a hack and his theories, which form a large part of my understanding of Sexuality were wrong, then whom do I study?

What causes some guys to have foot fetishes? I've always thought it was because they grew up in a family with no feet.

>2012
>Dat fruedian logic

ishiggydiggydoo

>>4880589

Jung for starters

Better question - If it was treatable or curable, would homosexuals demand that parents not have be able to treat their kids for it should they start showing signs of homosexuality?

>>4880589

http://borngay.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000019#Ulrichs

Genetics.

>>4880610
Like xmen 3 I would think.

>>4880589

You can use >>4880615, to read various theorists who stand on differing sides of the fence.

Homosexuality is most probably an almaglamation of both hereditary factors and environmental factors. I do not think there is any one homosexual that you can classify as, born gay, or as someone who became gay because of there upbringing. It's a tendency of both nature and nurture in my eyes. But just like some people will gravitate towards certain fetishes, likes and dislikes, our genetic disposition is probably a large factor in deciding our sexual preferences.

No one can pin point why someone may have a foot Fetish. Were they born with it? Did they develop it? I'm sure they didn't choose to look at feet and get turned on.

It would be silly for someone to claim that this tendency towards feet was born into the baby, but its equally silly to say that it is entirely an nurture issue.

It seems fairly obvious that homosexuality in men is due to aberrant brain structure and/or chemistry. This aberration in turn being the product of genetic predisposition plus environmental triggers or in some cases relatively rare cases a birth defect.

As for female sexuality I remember reading a paper that suggests that that subject is a bit more complex as it seems that even adult women can actually change their sexuality to become bisexual or even homosexual.

What's puzzling in both these cases is why? The only thing I can think of is its some sort of response to overpopulation ie trying to keep the population stable so it doesn't outstrip the food supply and cause a population crash.

There is evidence that it is hereditary through the female line. A particular sequence that causes increased sexual desire in women may cause homosexuality in their male offspring. So if your mom is a whore you're probably gay.
The last part isn't confirmed, but it is confirmed that homosexuality comes down the maternal line in many cases.

>>4880694
>adult women can actually change their sexuality to become bisexual or even homosexual

Interdasting. Can it work the other way?

>>4880694
its an evolutionary hold-over from parthenogenic lizards in our distant past.

>>4880709
>Can it work the other way?
Women do not appear to have male-type sexual orientations, so "become bisexual or homosexual" would be a misnomer as they weren't heterosexual(in the male sense) to start with.

>>What is Sexual Orientation and Do Women Have One
>>J. Micheal Bailey
>The category specific male sexual arousal pattern is the primary sexual motivation that directs male sexual activity to certain kinds of individuals (most often women, but sometimes men) rather than others. Indeed, I content that a man's category specific male sexual arousal pattern IS his sexual orientation. Most women lack this strong directional motivation, and so it is not surprising that their sexual behavior is more malleable and sexually fluid. . .I review research on the male sexual arousal pattern and argue for equating sexual arousal pattern with sexual orientation.

>>A Sex Difference in the Specificity of Sexual Arousal
>ABSTRACT––Sexual arousal is category-specific in men; heterosexual men are more aroused by female than by male sexual stimuli, whereas homosexual men show the opposite pattern. . .In contrast to men, women showed little category specificity on either the genital or the subjective measure. Both heterosexual and homosexual women experienced strong genital arousal to both male and female sexual stimuli. . .In a second study, we showed that our results for females are unlikely to be explained by ascertainment biases.

>>4880709
No idea but I don't see why not.

I can't seem to find the actual study I read but here is a related article http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1296628/Scientists-say-more-women-changing-sexuality-mid-l
ife-Can-really-true-And-whats-emotional-cost.html

>>4880720
I'd be interested in reading about this do you have any sauce?

The only disadvantage to having a homosexual child from an evolutionary standpoint is that he/she cannot have offspring of his/her own. However they still provided much needed labor, they were still hunters and gatherers and still provided for families. It is only recent times that society is tolerant enough for gay people to flaunt their status, otherwise they would have simply been "not homemaker types" and left like that.

Obviously it's better to have heterosexual children from an evolutionary standpoint, but then it's also better to strike the genetic lottery and have beautiful children that can easily find mates. However that's not how evolution works. You cannot pick and choose the traits you want your children to have, nor can you pick a mate which is more or less likely to produce homosexual offspring.

>>4880772
>cannot have offspring of his/her own

Are you retarded? Homosexual =/= sterile. Yes, they CAN have offspring. Males in particular can donate sperm if they really don't want to go through the act of sex.

>>4880772
i'm pretty sure sexuality wasn't that big a deal in ye olden times. People got married out of practicality, and had kids because you needed kids. I sincerely doubt hunter-gatherer lesbians didn't have kids, homosexual males may have had a harder... er softer... time of it, but I'm not convinced they couldn't manage it.

Falling didn't become a major concern for quite awhile.

>>4880802
>>4880797
Correction, then fellow scholars. Worse case scenario was that they would not have offspring. Obviously otherwise they would be no different than heterosexual offspring.