Is being gay a inherited/environmentally introduced thing, or... Well what do you think /sci/?

File: 51 KB, 1200x928, 1386303006308.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Thu Dec 5 23:10:44 2013 No.6206341 [Reply] [Original]

Is being gay a inherited/environmentally introduced thing, or... Well what do you think /sci/?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 23:15:14 2013 No.6206348 Romans chapter 1

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 23:16:44 2013 No.6206352 >>6206341 It's a psychological inclination, I doubt it's inherited

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 5 23:20:13 2013 No.6206360 >>6206352 >Fear is a psychological inclination, I doubt it's inherited

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 01:59:43 2013 No.6206616 >>6206352 Is it psychological or biological?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 02:09:43 2013 No.6206629 It is possible to be either way. I would think there is likely something that goes wrong in brain development. I googled it, this Wikipedia page might be of interest to you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 02:31:14 2013 No.6206653

I like the theory that it is induced to control against over-population.
That is, biologically induced, and not by some NWO.
But that raises questions about queers on an island isolated from everyone else. But if you are thinking with the Unified Conscious in mind, then meh.

But personally, I just believe it is a preference that cannot be passed down.
Some preferences can, like say you prefer the color red.
But that's not to say that it isn't influenced by nurture.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 02:32:44 2013 No.6206654 >>6206616 >Is it psychological or biological? Maybe it's psycho-biological? Or bio-psychological? Psy-bo?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 10:49:29 2013 No.6207234 >>6206352 >It's a psychological inclination, I doubt it's inherited Because our consciousness resides in our soul, not in our brain

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 12:57:58 2013 No.6207380

>>6206341
There are different types of it.

I think the most common case is society persuading a guy into thinking he's gay
Then there are others like transsexuals which a re clearly mentally ill.
And there are others too who have no other chance due to hormonal disorders like those with androgen insensitivity syndrome and those with genetic mutations.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:01:28 2013 No.6207388 How many gay posters are on /sci/? I mean out of the closet. >>6206629 Gays are more intelligent and wise. Maybe something goes right?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:02:58 2013 No.6207390 As with most things, it's likely not that black and white. That is, it's likely some combination if the two.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:03:29 2013 No.6207391 >>6207380 I was about to call you a faggot for saying that, but the i realized you probably have no friends, so would find it quite difficult to empathize with other people, least of all the homosexuals.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:06:28 2013 No.6207394
File: 235 KB, 540x1086, 1386353160131.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6206341
There is a study that found that women related to gay men are more fertile. This means that the gene that makes men faggots makes women more fertile. In my opinion it is an awesome gene. Not only there will be less men in the competition for women but also makes women more efficient breeders.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:09:28 2013 No.6207396 >>6207391 >name calling >on /sci/ >using normalfag insults Just fuck off already >>>/soc/ >>>/r9k/ >>>/b/ >>>/lgbt/ >>>/reddit/

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:10:28 2013 No.6207402
File: 402 KB, 779x764, Screen Shot 2013-11-02 at 10.39.56 AM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6206341
most homosexuality and transgender bullshit you see these days is due to disease/hormonal disruption/toxicity/etc. the older, non-rabid form of homosexuality was just a mental disorder.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:12:58 2013 No.6207405 >>6207380 >There are different types Im a Type-3 homosex, a.k.a homosex artifiactor a.k.a. engineer, I only suck cocks but I imagine they're women.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:14:28 2013 No.6207410

>>6206341
Hostile womb. 85% of "gay" men have older brothers.

Same-sex attraction is a temptation most people can easily avoid. There are no gay people. There are only people who do not avoid same-sex temptation.

And not coincidentally, 99% of them are not christians. And 99% of the ones who say they are christians are liars.

If you want to be what the bible calls a wicked abomination to God, expect consequences.

If you want the power to resist same-sex temptations, repent and accept Jesus.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:17:59 2013 No.6207420 >>6207396 Fine. How can you state a transexual is mentally ill if you don't even know what aspects of the brain are changed?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:18:28 2013 No.6207422 >>6207402 bit far fetched that

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:23:58 2013 No.6207438 >>6207420 That's the same as saying How can Lesch-Nyhan Syndrome be a mental disease if all we know about it is that the kid lacks HGPRT?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:29:28 2013 No.6207449 >>6207438 Not at all, because theres no consistent genetic test to establish that there even is a transexual brain influence. If there was, you'd have cited it.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:35:58 2013 No.6207453 >>6207410 lel, you had me going until about halfway through

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:37:58 2013 No.6207457

As always with these multifaceted and complex behavioral traits such as sexual orientation, it's a combination of genetics and environment. Just to point out what might be obvious, but if there is an environmental influence that doesn't mean it's a choice.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:49:29 2013 No.6207482 >>6207457 It's not a choice but it's still unethical. Not that homosexuality is unethical, but the cause and people ignoring the problem are.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:53:28 2013 No.6207492 >>6207482 What exactly is the problem? What is unethical then?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:54:59 2013 No.6207494 File: 250 KB, 1008x864, 1386356053424.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6207457 the actions and the lifestyle are a choice.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:54:59 2013 No.6207495 >>6207482 >Not that homosexuality is unethical, but the cause and people ignoring the problem are. what?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:55:29 2013 No.6207499 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuK9pxjBwX8 Just saying.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:57:28 2013 No.6207502 >>6207494 So I'm guessing the same people who hate gays must love lesbians, then, since they have practically no STIs at all. (Oh wait, you're just retarded.)

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:57:58 2013 No.6207501 >>6207499 no ones going to watch a 20 minute video about pro-gay propaganda. and pretending the only reason people hate queers is due to religion is another lie and propaganda. refer to >>6207494 "Just saying."

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:58:58 2013 No.6207503 >>6207494 >implying free will

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 13:59:58 2013 No.6207505

>>6207492
Homosexuality is a disorder caused by genetics and enviromental factors. It is the objective of Medicine find a cure to such a thing, and a responsibility of public health to deal with the environmental factors that cause it.

I'm not saying faggots should be killed, but these people are lacking the characteristic of alive beings that is reproducing. We must put an end to homosexuality.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:00:29 2013 No.6207509 >>6207508 >anything that hurts my feelings is /pol/ despite that obamas own administration's statistics are listed on the image

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:00:58 2013 No.6207508 >>6207482 >>6207494 What's with the /pol/ raids lately?

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:01:28 2013 No.6207510

>>6207505
>Homosexuality is a disorder
By definition it is not.

>but these people are lacking the characteristic of alive beings that is reproducing
Ignoring the naturalistic fallacy here for a second: You know there are other ways of contributing to the gene-pool besides direct reproduction, right?

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:01:28 2013 No.6207512

>>6207494
This is a very male-focused study but I read something similar, the main reason of the transmission is drugs/needles and/or sex for drugs or money mainly though.

Also, bug chasing isn't just a homosexual activity. I also don't see why a person having a more higher chance of having HIV should make you hate him. Just don't have sex with homosexual people then.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:02:28 2013 No.6207515 >>6207505 >Homosexuality is a disorder It hasn't been considered a disorder by Western medicine in many years.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:02:28 2013 No.6207516 >>6207509 >obamas See, there you pretty much admitted to being from /pol/. Why the fuck else would you mention a politician?

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:04:58 2013 No.6207520

>>6207512
>the main reason of the transmission is drugs/needles and/or sex for drugs or money mainly though.
its funny that you would repeat such a lie even though the image youre replying to specifically shows that needles and drugs+needles are a small case (and still majority homosexual)

>Also, bug chasing isn't just a homosexual activity.
yes it is. there are no heterosexual bug chasing parties, forums, or studies like there are for homosexuals. also exceptions dont break the rule.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:04:58 2013 No.6207521 File: 61 KB, 468x340, 1386356656076.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6207508

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:05:58 2013 No.6207528 >>6207505 Why is reproducing even relevant in a highly over populated environment? In my opinion homos save resources.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:06:28 2013 No.6207531 >>6207521 I'm not even in the argument. It's just clear that you're from /pol/. I can tell from the retardism.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:06:59 2013 No.6207529 >>6207521 >post a /pol/ meme >to show that you're not a troll from /pol/

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:07:28 2013 No.6207533

>>6207510
>It hasn't been considered a disorder by Western medicine in many years.
>>6207515
>By definition it is not.

And that's the problem with political correctness, which gives bias on polemic topics. Not trying to be /pol/ here, but if we one day find out what's causing homosexuality and we can fix it, it would be our duty to fix it. It's not a choice, after all, we should at least give people the chance to choose.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:07:59 2013 No.6207532 >>6207516 because youre claiming anyone who details the statistical behavior of homosexuals is a right wing racist nazi? i thought that was pretty obvious but apparently nothing is immune from the dis-ingenuousness of your kind.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:08:58 2013 No.6207534 >>6207532 >behavior of homosexuals is a right wing racist nazi? When did I say anything of the sort? I'm simply saying you're from /pol/. Are you denying it?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:09:29 2013 No.6207538 >>6207533 >And that's the problem with political correctness It's not defined that way for the sake of correctness, but because homosexuality simply isn't pathological. You're needlessly politicizing something that we can approach objectively, and have.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:09:58 2013 No.6207536 >>6207529 >>6207531 You make the claim that i'm from /pol/. Can you prove i am from /pol/? Otherwise i will dismiss your argument and consider it petty name calling.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:10:28 2013 No.6207541 >>6207533 >don't like a fact >must be just "political correctness"

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:10:28 2013 No.6207542 >>6207536 >Can you prove i am from /pol/? I can't, no. Then again, I don't have to, because that statement wasn't meant for you to respond to. It was an observation, directed at everyone else BUT you.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:10:58 2013 No.6207539

>>6207534
how about instead of shouting ad-hominems at people who hurt your feelings you just admit that homosexuals are crazed nut cases who are literally evolutionarily programmed to seek out HIV and destroy themselves so they dont reproduce? do you believe in evolution? this is the simplest, most logical conclusion for their behavior according to evolutionary biology.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:11:29 2013 No.6207543 >>6207538 It is technically pathological because it makes the person to suffer from doubt and low self steem.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:12:58 2013 No.6207545

>>6207539
>admit that homosexuals are crazed nut cases
by definition they are not

> this is the simplest, most logical conclusion for their behavior according to evolutionary biology.
Pretty ironic. You demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of evolutionary biology by making this statement. As I said earlier:
>Ignoring the naturalistic fallacy here for a second: You know there are other ways of contributing to the gene-pool besides direct reproduction, right?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:13:58 2013 No.6207547 >>6207542 Then you're just shitposting here. Go back to >>>/s4s/ and come back when you grow the fuck up.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:13:58 2013 No.6207548

>>6207538
who says it isnt pathological? the APA? there are tons of studies and statistics showing that homosexuality pretty much goes hand and hand with all sorts of pathologies. even people with depression function more normally than homosexuals do and thats considered a pathology.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:13:58 2013 No.6207550 >>6207543 That's not how we define pathological. Technically, it's not at all.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:13:58 2013 No.6207551 >>6207543 That's incorrect.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:14:28 2013 No.6207554 >>6207547 >Then you're just shitposting here That's not for you to decide. >>6207548 >even people with depression function more normally than homosexuals do and thats considered a pathology. By definition they do not.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:14:59 2013 No.6207553 >>6207545 >by definition they are not >Using arbitrary claims known as "definitions"

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:15:28 2013 No.6207558 >>6207553 This is the science board, we have to be precise. Please try to reformulate your argument so that it actually makes logical sense.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:15:58 2013 No.6207555 >>6207551 Prove it's incorrect.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:16:29 2013 No.6207560 >>6207555 The burden is obviously on you to support that statement, which is a fringe view directly contradicted by mainstream medicine.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:16:29 2013 No.6207561 >>6207559 >so essentially youre basing everything on an appeal to authority? No, that's not what I'm doing.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:16:58 2013 No.6207559
File: 370 KB, 707x789, Screen Shot 2013-11-01 at 1.30.29 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6207554
>By definition they do not.
so essentially youre basing everything on an appeal to authority? okay then. i guess theres not much more to say to you.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:17:28 2013 No.6207564 File: 309 KB, 705x788, Screen Shot 2013-11-01 at 1.32.39 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6207561 try arguing facts and logic rather than semantics then.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:17:58 2013 No.6207562 >>6207558 Alright. Definitions are arbitrary claims, as opposed to well known facts. Basing your argument on a definition makes it lose validity.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:18:28 2013 No.6207568 Is left-handedness a disorder?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:21:29 2013 No.6207572 >>6207568 It is by definition.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:23:58 2013 No.6207575 >>6207572 But I only write with left, is that okay?

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:24:59 2013 No.6207578

>>6207564
>>6207562
Sure. That classification of homosexuality as a mental disorder began to be subjected to critical scrutiny in research, which consistently failed to produce any empirical or scientific basis for regarding homosexuality as a disorder or abnormality. As a result of such accumulated research, professionals in medicine, mental health, and the behavioral and social sciences, opposing the classification of homosexuality as a mental disorder, claimed the conclusion that it was inaccurate, and that the DSM classification reflected untested assumptions that were based on once-prevalent social norms and clinical impressions from unrepresentative samples which consisted of patients seeking therapy and individuals whose conduct brought them into the criminal justice system. So in short, the definition changed based on empirical grounds. The results of initial studies indicating that homosexuality was pathological were biassed because the sampling pool was biased towards homesexuals not representative of the population. That's why the definition matters, it's not arbitrary. Hence, I'm attacking you on the semantics.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:26:28 2013 No.6207580 >>6207572 What definition?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:27:28 2013 No.6207584 >>6207553 >ignoring the actual argument part of the post

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:27:58 2013 No.6207582

It seems to be an inherited tendency that may or may not develop. This is supported by data indicating increased rates of homosexuality among people with homosexual close relatives. In the most striking example, when one twin is homosexual, the other twin is homosexual a majority of the time, suggesting a strong level of inheritability. However, the presence of twins of differing sexual orientations necessitates the conclusion that the inheritability is not a guarantee.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:29:58 2013 No.6207587 >>6207578 thats actually false, the vote to take it off the DSM had only a 30% Yes vote out of the total board of electors, the majority simply abstained due to political pressure.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:31:58 2013 No.6207594 >>6207587 [citation needed]

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:32:58 2013 No.6207596 >>6207521 and yet you have such an image already prepared on /pol/ discussion in a non pol board. Let me posit this one, if being gay is a choice, why do you feel the need to impact someone else's choice?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:35:59 2013 No.6207599 >>6207578 That seems to have shut them up.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:35:59 2013 No.6207600

>>6207594
>On April 9, 1974, results of the vote were announced. >Only 10,555 of the 17,905 APA members had voted in the election. The results were as follows,

>Total APA members eligible to vote: 17,905
>Number of APA members that actually voted: 10,555
>Number of members that “Abstained”: 367
>Number of “ No” votes-votes to keep “homosexuality” in the DSM as a mental disorder: 3,810
>Number of “Yes” votes-votes to remove “homosexuality” from the DSM as a mental disorder: 5,854

(The Long Road to Freedom, ed. by Mark Thompsan1994, p. 104)

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:37:58 2013 No.6207603 File: 347 KB, 688x759, Screen Shot 2013-11-29 at 3.18.35 AM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6207599 you were saying? >>6207600 >>6207587

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:38:59 2013 No.6207606 >>6207600 >17,905 APA members >Number of members that “Abstained”: 367 That seems to be in direct contradiction with your claim that: > the majority simply abstained due to political pressure.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:40:28 2013 No.6207612 >>6207600 "well these guys didnt vote, hurr they must agree with my political opinion" 7000 or so members wanted to vote that homosexuality wasnt a mental disorder, but political pressure in the USA forced them to instead abstain.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:40:28 2013 No.6207613

>>6207606
thats called an official vote to abstain

17,905 total members, only 5,5854 voted yes to remove it. thats 30% consensus that gays are not mentally disordered. you said they removed it due to "empirical evidence" and other nonsense. the truth is most backed off because they were being slandered and attacked. just look at what modern gays and other left wing activists do today to achieve their social goals.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:40:58 2013 No.6207611 File: 95 KB, 241x289, 1386358811837.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6207603 Title in that pic looks more poorly worded than anything.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:42:59 2013 No.6207616 >>6207611 http://www.queerty.com/can-we-please-just-start-admitting-that-we-do-actually-want-to-indoctrinate-kids-20110512/

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:43:28 2013 No.6207617 >>6207603 This says they want to instill beliefs in children, not turn them gay. Frankly, it's a refreshing bit of honesty, given that everyone attempts to indoctrinate their children with their own beliefs and attitudes.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:44:28 2013 No.6207618

>>6207613
"durr well look at what this extremist element of a group has done in entirely different situations, it must have effected the result of this vote"

7000 people abstained from voting to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder due to political pressure from the westboro baptist church, look at all the stuff they've done in the past.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:46:58 2013 No.6207620
File: 385 KB, 672x757, Screen Shot 2013-11-02 at 6.30.35 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6207617
what beliefs? that liking boys is the same as liking girls and no one should make a distinction? that you can switch between female and male at will? that pumping your body full of chemicals because you want to have boobs is totally tubular?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:47:28 2013 No.6207622 >>6207613 >everyone who didn't vote abstained on purpose Yeah, okay. Show me other APA votes with much larger vote turnouts and maybe that will make sense. The more likely reality is that any given vote has a lot of absentees.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:47:58 2013 No.6207621

>>6207613
It's a majority vote. Typically not 100% votes, not by a long shot. That's why election results are determined by proportion of voters, not proportion of poulation.
>the truth is most backed off because they were being slandered and attacked.
There's no basis for this claim either. Even the voting results you posted don't show any reasons for WHY people did or did not vote the way they did. This is your opinion, not fact.

>ou said they removed it due to "empirical evidence"
Because that's what happened. Tests such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory indicated that homosexual men and women were not distinguishable from heterosexual men and women in functioning. These studies failed to support the previous assumptions that family dynamics, trauma and gender identity were factors in the development of sexual orientation. That's why they removed homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM. Here's my reference, because I can sense you're going to ask for one:
http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/therapeutic-response.pdf

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:49:28 2013 No.6207627

>>6207620

Those are beliefs, yes. I'm really not seeing the difference between that and attempting to instill your children with the opposite beliefs. the point is that indoctrination of children is something most people attempt to do, regardless of their beliefs.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:49:58 2013 No.6207624
File: 225 KB, 370x276, 1386359360427.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6207616
>When I say recruit, I mean “get on our side” and “get to help fight our battles for us.”
It's poorly written but it seems clear to me that the author is talking about getting people to accept homosexuality. That happens to include closeted people.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:50:28 2013 No.6207629 >>6207627 because you have no right to force your beliefs on other peoples children, thats why.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:56:58 2013 No.6207635 >>6207621 Anyway, I have to go. No more responses from me, unless I feel like it when I get home drunk. Good night.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 14:58:28 2013 No.6207642 d5721820461d477687f364a3b1dd1114fd480a3a

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 15:27:59 2013 No.6207674 >>6207388 >Gays are more intelligent and wise. Maybe something goes right? ***citation needed

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:05:28 2013 No.6207801 What the fuck happens here? When did this turn into a /pol/itical debate?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:20:58 2013 No.6207820 >>6207801 What if i told you that it was /pol/ from the start?

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:33:28 2013 No.6207831

It is a genetic FALTER (and fucking falter is what it is) a genetic MUTATION that happens when a fetus develops in a womb. It is born with a fucked up sexuality JUST LIKE DOWN SYNDROME ARE BORN, BY AN ACCIDENT THAT FUCKS THEM UP. Homosexuality is a DISABILITY because it prevents a specie from finding a suitable fertile mate, just like DOWN SYNDROME THAT PREVENTS A SPECIE FROM DOING ANYTHING. It is no clever devise from nature because if humans had inherent overpopulation control we'd just be born sterile when the time is right. Or we would have just been outdone by another specie.

tl;dr: Gays are like down syndrome retards. They're born that way, and it's a bad thing to laugh at them, but at the same time you can't take them seriously.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:36:58 2013 No.6207833 >>6207831 >every genetic falter is automatically bad

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 17:38:28 2013 No.6207836 >>6207833 Yes, because IT MAKES YOU UNABLE TO BE INCLINED TO FIND A MATE YOU CAN REPRODUCE WITH, AND THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF EVOLUTION.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 18:20:28 2013 No.6207896 >>6206341 faggotism is both envionmental + inherited

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:08:58 2013 No.6207965

>>6207548
Correlation=/=Causation

Current models of depression are "bio-psycho-social". You need to take into account the sociological factors such as homophobia, rejection, adversity and so forth.

Still. Similar correlation are found sex and a range of disorders.

Men are more likely to be autisic than women.
Womenare more likely than men to have anxiety disorders.

Does this mean that being man is pathological ? Obviously, no. Mutatis mutandis, Homosexuality is not a pathology either.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:20:28 2013 No.6207993 >>6207674 Stephen Fry

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:21:58 2013 No.6207995 It is not genetic. If it was it would have been selected against and would not exist. It is due to hormones ether during foetus development or at puberty. Definitely not genetic.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:24:58 2013 No.6208004 >>6207820 Just promise me /sci/ doesn't post on /pol/?

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 19:36:29 2013 No.6208032

>>6206341
Clearly genes that cause attraction to male humans is good for reproduction. Seeing as how men also carry the X chromosome along with every other chromosome that females also get any such attraction to men gene would necessarily exist in male populations.

Still dosen't entirely explane lesbeans though.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 20:36:28 2013 No.6208125 ITT: /pol/ losing a debate

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 20:44:28 2013 No.6208131 >>6208032 >attraction to men gene Are you really that fucking stupid?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 20:59:58 2013 No.6208149 >>6208131 >Are you really that fucking smart? Fix'd

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 21:02:29 2013 No.6208160 >>6207995 >implying no genetic component to hormone expression

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 21:04:28 2013 No.6208165 >>6208160 >>6208149 >implying twin studies havent proven that its not genetic

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 21:04:58 2013 No.6208164 >>6208149 Thanks for answering my question. A clear yes would be the answer.

Anonymous Fri Dec 6 21:10:59 2013 No.6208176

>>6208165
>implying twin studies have proven that its not genetic
>have proven that its not
>proven not
>proven a negative

Wow that's some powerful science there.

So your telling me that they took every gay person that has does and will exist, made twins for them and demonstrated that the twins were not gay?

Cuz whoever can do that kind of science clearly deserves notoriety.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 21:18:58 2013 No.6208186 >>6207629 And yet everyone tries to do it anyway

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 6 21:19:58 2013 No.6208189 >>6207831 >It is no clever devise from nature because if humans had inherent overpopulation control we'd just be born sterile when the time is right. >implying nature is actually good at doing what it does

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:29:26 2013 No.6208489

>>6208186
You're forgetting if we don't educate our kids they will grow to be savages, feral kids in the city. The decision of who to fuck and i risk the chance of cancer to get fucked can only be chosen by adults. We should hide the faggot world from kids and teens until then. If they ask, tell them the objective truth: These people are faggots and for an incomprehensible reason they want to avoid reproduction and choose hedonism instead, you can do it when you grow up.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 01:30:26 2013 No.6208495 >>6208189 >Implying nature does shit >Implying we're not alive by chance >Implying we don't think by chance >Implying we're not forming societies and killing each other by chance

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 02:41:55 2013 No.6208647 >>6207410 wait, but the hostile womb part is real, right?

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 02:49:25 2013 No.6208659

>>6207457
/thread

>nature vs nurture fallacy
nope, it's both.

people don't wake up and choose to be gay.

>>6207831
>using genetic mutation in such a broad sense
>likening all genetic mutation to down syndrome
>any genetic mutation
>a bad thing

get a load of this retard

so many fucking morons on 4chan, holy shit

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 02:51:25 2013 No.6208666 >>6207410 >85% of "gay" men have older brothers, who abused them in bathtubs incestuious encounters between siblings is far more common than reported

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 03:15:56 2013 No.6208713 >visit by mother two years ago >talk about how socially retarded i am >talk about my first and only (ex)gf back when i was 19 >ask if i'm gay >father is gay so i could maybe have inherited it Why would she even want to know whehter I'm gay or not?

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 07:38:07 2013 No.6208944

>>6207833
>>6208189
>>6208659
Why are faggots so obsessed with being thought of a clever devise by nature to save the human race?

Do you think you are better than any other retard born with a disability?

You're not. Accept the fact you are simply accidents that in the world of nature would be at a grave disadvantage. I am defending your rights by saying you are born disabled and hence there shouldn't be discrimination against you. But no, you aren't happy with that. You want something more. Which is why everyone hates fags.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 7 13:10:38 2013 No.6209453 >>6208666 >666 and the monkeys throw their own shit

Anonymous Sat Dec 7 15:42:43 2013 No.6209743

>>6208944
> you aren't happy with that.
They are retarded, they are happy because they don't care about nothing but having orgasms.
> You want something more.
They want to turn the world gay because they think they would be happier
>Which is why everyone hates fags.
Completely the opposite. People against faggots are being discriminated everywhere and this site is an example of that. Someone sees there's a guy that hates fags and they socially stigmatize him forever, same happens with people who don't like niggers and other shits.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 02:59:48 2013 No.6210868 I consider myself bisexual but am exclusively romantically interested in men I'm in a loving close relationship with a totally normal guy I'm going to school for organic chemistry and/or biochem I just want to do science is that too much to ask?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 03:40:18 2013 No.6210918 File: 33 KB, 375x500, 1386492035071.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6210868 I think you may find yourself enjoying engineering more.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 04:36:48 2013 No.6210955 File: 17 KB, 225x225, 1386495385063.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6207410 pray away the gay!

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 05:47:26 2013 No.6211028 >>6207995 Gay people can have non gay siblings in which case they too have the gene and it carries on

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 05:57:55 2013 No.6211037 >>6211028 except homosexuality is due to prenatal hormonal conditions, not a "gay gene" which is a complete myth created by people who know little about the science behind all this and are too emotionally involved with this issue to accept any criticism

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 06:09:25 2013 No.6211058 >>6211037 Stop being an idiot, of course it's not as simple as 'the gay gene', but it's definitely not as simple as 'prenatal hormonal conditions' either. Sexual preference is the result of a combination of both genetic and environmental factors.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 06:12:55 2013 No.6211065 >>6211037 What if a male homosexual gene were expressed in females by leading to higher sexual attractiveness?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 06:22:25 2013 No.6211077 >>6206341 Twin studies show that there is a significant heritable component, but no study has been large enough to nail the number down. It's anywhere betwen 40 and 70%.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 06:24:25 2013 No.6211080 >>6206348 Treating the word of some kike middle manager in the church as divine. lrn2christianity

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 06:30:25 2013 No.6211093 >>6211080 >kike hi /po/, how's life?

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 06:45:55 2013 No.6211112

>>6211058
if you swap "genetic" for "prenatal hormones" I agree

mootnote: prenatal hormones affect brain development, giving a 25 year old homosexual testosterone will not "masculinize" the brain, which is the error scientists made in the 1950s

mootnote 2: excessive androgens may in fact have the opposite effect, leading to homosexuality, it is complex but we can narrow it down to the effect of hormones on brain development in the womb
>>6211065
features associated with sexual attraction are largely unrelated to any genes that might influence sexual orientation, there may be genes that increase the *likelihood* of homosexuality occurring but rates of homosexuality are more or less even throughout the human population

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 07:53:55 2013 No.6211150 mental illness

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 11:48:55 2013 No.6211445 >>6211150 please fuck off

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 12:01:56 2013 No.6211456 >>6211150 by definition it is not

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 12:03:26 2013 No.6211458 >>6211456 by definition it is, by an appeal of authority to official revised government backed organizations it is not

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 12:06:26 2013 No.6211460 >>6211458 >government backed organizations >implying the definition is determined by a single organization rather than defined and refined by cross-continent organizations Please take that America-centered horse shit somewhere else.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 12:08:55 2013 No.6211461 >>6211460 >implying america is the only place with government backed medical organizations >implying people dont rely on the american DSM either way

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 12:14:56 2013 No.6211464 >>6211461 >>implying people dont rely on the american DSM either way That's a simple fact, which you can easily look up.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 12:47:25 2013 No.6211484 >>6211458 >hurr durr appeal to authority Do you even science? An appeal to authority is appropriate here, because you are disagreeing with a globally recognized definition based on empirical data.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:00:55 2013 No.6211497
File: 28 KB, 513x298, 1386525627423.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6211484
there is no empirical data that proves homosexuality isnt a mental illness. stop repeating nonsense. there in fact more empirical data suggesting it is a mental illness/defect/neurological disorder/etc.

the idea that homosexuality is completely normal is a social construct and an appeal to (corrupted) authority.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html#.UqSzko10G2w

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:12:25 2013 No.6211510 File: 61 KB, 600x355, 1386526364458.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6211497 Being different from the standard doesn't makes something a illness

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:20:55 2013 No.6211525
File: 84 KB, 960x468, 1386526811639.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6211510
true but it does indicate a possible defect. combine with all the other empirical data >>>6207494 and you have a clear case for illness or disorder of some kind, whether mental or neurological.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:22:55 2013 No.6211529

>>6211497
>there is no empirical data that proves homosexuality isnt a mental illness.
There is, you fucking moron. And a fucking lot of it too.

Quantitative methods to assess human personality (e.g., Eysenck Personality Inventory, Cattell’s Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire) and mental disorders (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory]) were developed indicate that homosexual men and women were essentially similar to heterosexual men and women in adaptation and functioning (Siegelman, 1979; M. Wilson & Green, 1971; see also review by Gonsiorek, 1991). Studies failed to support theories that regarded family dynamics, gender identity, or trauma as factors in the development of sexual orientation (e.g., Bell, Weinberg, & Hammersmith, 1981; Bene, 1965; Freund & Blanchard, 1983; Freund & Pinkava, 1961; Hooker, 1969; McCord, McCord, & Thurber, 1962; D. K. Peters & Cantrell, 1991; Siegelman, 1974, 1981; Townes, Ferguson, & Gillem, 1976).

>http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html#.UqSzko10G2w
No shit sherlock. How new are you? Protip: alternate brain structure doesn't imply pathology.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:27:55 2013 No.6211532 >>6211525 you don't know what empirical means, do you?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:30:25 2013 No.6211535 File: 25 KB, 423x80, Screen Shot 2013-12-08 at 1.29.51 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6211532 scientific journals and health organizations

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:31:56 2013 No.6211537 >>6211535 >scientific journals and health organizations arent enough for you? sorry my text got cut off

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:31:56 2013 No.6211538 >>6211535 Very good. Now apply that definition to the .png image.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:37:56 2013 No.6211542

>>6211529
depressed people can pass that test too but depression is still a pathology and depressed people have greater quality of lives than the average sex crazed drug addicted and diseased homosexual. also the last one merely states that trauma doesnt make one more likely to be gay, which has never come up in this thread.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:38:55 2013 No.6211543 >>6211538 the png image has all sorts of data from health organizations and universities, so you make zero sense. >scientific journals and health organizations arent enough for you?

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:42:55 2013 No.6211553

>>6211543
>you make zero sense.
Unfortunately it's not my problem that you're too goddamn stupid to understand a simple point. Here's a hint: random statistics aren't empirical evidence if they're open to interpretation. Do you even science?
>scientific journals
Show me a recent paper that indicates homosexuality is pathological. Note that I'm not looking for numbers as in that image, but a paper specifically aimed at showing homosexuality is pathological, in a rigorous and empirical manner. Papers that show the exact opposite have already been posted in: >>6211529

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:43:55 2013 No.6211556 >>6211542 >depressed people can pass that test too No, on the whole they can't you idiot. That's the whole point of these tests, to determine pathology.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:47:56 2013 No.6211561 >>6211542 >sex crazed >drug addicted >diseased pathological >homosexual non-pathological See the difference?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:51:55 2013 No.6211563 >>6207536 You are from /pol/.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:52:25 2013 No.6211566

>>6211561
>See the difference?
no, not really. why is being sex crazed a pathology and not homosexuality? how about bestiality? or necrophilia? how about people obsessed with body mutilation/modification? your logic seems to be based off preconceived notions rather than looking at things objectively.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 13:55:29 2013 No.6211570

>>6211566
Because homosexuality isn't harmful to the self (note that not every homosexual is a bug chaser, or sex crazed etc), or hampers societal functioning, whereas the others you mentioned do. Protip: pathologies are determined by interaction with environment.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:03:29 2013 No.6211591 >>6211570 how does being sex crazed hamper life? it doesnt. neither does bestiality or necrophilia or body modification. see, you really dont make any sense. youre trying to justify your beliefs, rather than searching for truth.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:05:30 2013 No.6211596
File: 999 KB, 250x251, 1386529552157.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

there is still no
as in ZERO
as in NO
evidence for a gay gene
and i suspect that, even if its found, tumblr will still just assume the scientists trying to find it were paid off by christian group or some other bullshit

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:08:00 2013 No.6211607 >>6206341 Probably mostly genetic in origin http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7689007.stm

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:09:59 2013 No.6211610 >>6211596 Ahem >>6211607

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:10:59 2013 No.6211615

>>6211591
>being sex crazed
The word 'crazed' implies addiction, which hampers functioning. Simply enjoying sex isn't pathological if it doesn't interfere with your daily functioning.
>neither does bestiality or necrophilia or body modification.
It depends on the extent of the phelia. These things are not by definition pathological, but they can be. You're the one who brought these up, I don't feel strongly about these either way. The point I'm making is simply that homosexuality is non-pathological because it doesn't hamper functioning and isn't destructive.

>sex crazed
>drug addicted
>diseased
These, however, are by definition pathological, for aforementioned reasons.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:11:00 2013 No.6211622

>>6211607
>no link to research paper, or source of any kind
right
however even if it is true, i wonder if any calls for a "cure" will be shout down
extra ironic if some closet gays would like this cure, but tumblr speaks for them and thus elevates themselves above what they're trying to defend

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:11:29 2013 No.6211621 >>6211596 http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/12/11/scientists-may-have-finally-unlocked-puzzle-of-why-people-are-gay

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:13:29 2013 No.6211627 >>6211622 You're implying that genetic is synonymous with pathological.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:13:30 2013 No.6211631

>>6211615
but the average homosexual is proven to be sex crazed. what we call homosexuality may actually be just a hyper-sexual disorder. if the majority of homosexuals are sex crazed, then how is it not a dysfunction? not all depressed people are dysfunctional, but the majority have a significant dysfunction and so we label it such as a pathology

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:13:59 2013 No.6211629 >>6211627 you're implying genetic means it cannot be altered

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:14:29 2013 No.6211634
File: 1021 KB, 400x210, 1386530084793.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6211596
Something as complex as human sexual preferences is polyfactorial.

But to assume genetics does not play a role is quite absurd as they can breed gay fruit flies and mice.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:14:29 2013 No.6211635 >>6211622 http://escholarship.org/uc/item/863841tx

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:14:59 2013 No.6211633 >>6211629 I'm not implying that at all you dumb shit.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:15:29 2013 No.6211640

>>6211631
>the average homosexual is proven to be sex crazed.
That's nonsense. Even if it were true, you're implying that something would be pathological if it has co-morbidity with another pathology. By that reasoning left-handedness would be pathological because left-handedness often co-occurs with dyslexia.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:15:59 2013 No.6211637 >>6211621 >epigenetic in other words, environmental, similar to almost every other environmental factor that can alter a person

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:17:59 2013 No.6211646 >>6211637 In other words, epigenetic.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:18:29 2013 No.6211655 >>6211650 the only* factor

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:18:59 2013 No.6211650 >>6211646 epigenetic = environment is the significant factor

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:19:00 2013 No.6211656 More epigenetic research http://www.nimbios.org/press/FS_homosexuality

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:19:00 2013 No.6211657 >>6211640 do the majority of left handers have dyslexia? no. therefore left handedness is not pathological.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:20:29 2013 No.6211658 >>6211656 >research stop posting news articles

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:21:29 2013 No.6211662 >>6211657 The majority of homosexuals aren't 'sex crazed' either. How the hell would you even define 'sex crazed'? I'm gonna have to ask you for a source for that statement.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:23:59 2013 No.6211664

That's not entirely the case.

There's a lot of noise in between the translation one's genotype and phenotypes

Even for simplest traits there are multiple steps between gene expression and observable phenotype.

Each step is somewhere along a gradient of more influenced by genetics vs. more influenced by environment.
And similarly, each epigenetic factor is partially heritable.

That's about as close to Lamarkian evolution we know we can get.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:23:59 2013 No.6211668
File: 48 KB, 500x410, 1386530612276.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6211658
>being too lazy to click a link in the article
amerifag

http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/668167

LOL I dont even care im not the guy posting the news articles and I actually agree with you

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:26:29 2013 No.6211678 >>6211668 >amerifag I'm European but whatever. I just don't feel like sifting through a mountain of shit to get to the actual paper. If there's a link to the actual paper in there, that's all we need.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:27:29 2013 No.6211685

>>6211662
>28% of homosexual men had more than 1000 partners: "Bell and Weinberg reported evidence of widespread sexual compulsion among homosexual men. 83% of the homosexual men surveyed estimated they had had sex with 50 or more partners in their lifetime, 43% estimated they had sex with 500 or more partners; 28% with 1,000 or more partners. Bell and Weinberg p 308."
> 79% of homosexual men say over half of sex partners are strangers: "The survey showed 79% of the respondents saying that over half of their sexual partners were strangers. Seventy percent said that over half of their sexual partners were people with whom they had sex only once. Bell and Weinberg pp.308-309."
>Modal range for homosexual sex partners 101-500: "In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that "the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101–500." In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than 1000 lifetime sexual partners. Paul Van de Ven et al., "A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men," Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997): 354."

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:29:00 2013 No.6211694 >>6211685 Where's the control group?

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:29:00 2013 No.6211695
File: 1.98 MB, 316x235, 1386530978431.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6211678
You actually going to read the report? I know I wont, just don't care that much. I'm only here because I'm a basement dwelling neck beard and this is what substitutes for social interaction in my miserable life.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:29:29 2013 No.6211690

>>6211662
>1978 study, 78% of gay men ad more than 100 partners, 28% more than 1000: "A far-ranging study of homosexual men published in 1978 revealed that 75 percent of self-identified, white, gay men admitted to having sex with more than 100 different males in their lifetime: 15 percent claimed 100-249 sex partners; 17 percent claimed 250- 499; 15 percent claimed 500-999; and 28 percent claimed more than 1,000 lifetime male sex partners. By 1984, after the AIDS epidemic had taken hold, homosexual men were reportedly curtailing promiscuity, but not by much. Instead of more than 6 partners per month in 1982, the average non-monogamous respondent in San Francisco reported having about 4 partners per month in 1984." The Health Risks of Gay Sex, John R. Diggs, Jr., M.D.
By John R. Diggs, Jr., M.D.
>There is an extremely low rate of sexual fidelity among homosexual men as compared to married heterosexuals. Among married females 85% reported sexual fidelity. Among married men, 75.5% reported sexual fidelity. Among homosexual males in their current relationship, 4.5% reported sexual fidelity. (Sources:Laumann, The Social Organization of Sexuality, 216; McWhirter and Mattison, The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop (1984): 252-253; Wiederman, "Extramarital Sex," 170.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:31:59 2013 No.6211701

The evidence is mounting that its biological. This confuses me though because I crossdress and take hormones, but up until the age of 18 I had never had gay thoughts, though I had experimented with my friends at at school.

http://www.bilerico.com/2013/11/do_gay_men_straight_men_have_different_facial_shap.php

http://bigthink.com/think-tank/the-gay-gene-new-evidence-supports-an-old-hypothesis

http://news.stanford.edu/pr/95/950310Arc5328.html

I do believe however people can be coaxed into homosexuality, however I don't a source for tat beyond computational neuroscience, and I'm not sure that its really so valid.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:31:59 2013 No.6211702 >>6211695 >You actually going to read the report? Probably not the whole thing, no, but the abstract already provides more information than the news article. And without the shitty journalistic interpretation too.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:32:29 2013 No.6211706 >>6211685 >>6211690 so where are you getting all of this from, and where's the relative comparison with age matched heterosexuals, and most importantly, where does it say anything about sexual addiction?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:37:29 2013 No.6211723 >>6211685 There was a picture from the Merchant's Guild of /pol/ debunking all of this but I think I lost it.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:38:29 2013 No.6211727 >>6211723 >debunking peer reviewed studies in scientific journals apparently you dont know how science works. you may have tried to counter it, but you didnt "debunk it"

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:40:59 2013 No.6211729 >>6211727 >implying what you posted said anything about sexual addiction

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:44:59 2013 No.6211737

>>6211727
I see where you got this now:
http://carm.org/statistics-homosexual-promiscuity
>christian apologetics and research ministry
Fucking lol.

I followed up on the actual sources, and most of them don't even match up. The articles don't contain the supposedly cited statistics. This is very, very poorly done, you idiot. Now try again.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:48:59 2013 No.6211746 >>6211737 my sides, what a goddamn moron

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:51:00 2013 No.6211760

>>6211737
how does that website using peer reviewed studies to defend their bias make the studies any less credible?

>I followed up on the actual sources, and most of them don't even match up.

proof? i looked through a few myself and found it to be there just as it was quoted.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:57:29 2013 No.6211775

>>6211760
>peer reviewed studies
Protip: half of these are not peer reviewed. Just because they have a fancy sounding title doesn't mean they're listed journals. For instance, the last one: http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02
This is the supposed source. It's from a christian organization, not a scientific journal.

The others don't contain the actual statistics that are being cited. For instance, the third one's supposed source: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3813477?uid=3738736&uid=2134&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21103088301767
This is an actually peer-reviewed parper, but makes no mention of number of sexual partners at all. It's aimed at detailing the statistics of same sex within different demographic groups of the gay scene.

You should know better than to cite horse shit like this. Not that all the studies are bad, but you're citing both bullshit 'studies' and actual studies that someone fraudulently miss-cited.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 14:58:29 2013 No.6211778 >>6211775 >same sex safe sex*

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 15:08:59 2013 No.6211805

>>6211760
It's taking too long for you to respond, and I've lost interest in arguing with you. Next time take the effort to look up the primary sources rather than blindly copying christian propaganda.

I'll check back in later to see if you've found an actual paper that shows gay people are 'sex crazed'. And include a link to the primary source this time dickhead.

Anonymous Sun Dec 8 17:05:06 2013 No.6212001

>>6211685
1) 1978 book, largely out-dated. Wikipedia says the following:
>Homosexualities is the study most commonly cited to prove that gay men are sexually promiscuous, but it was not based on a broad sample, and a more recent and extensive University of Chicago study, Edward O. Laumann et al's The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States, produced different results.
2) Same book as 1.
3) Peer-reviewed article, but doesn't contain those statistics.
>>6211690
4) The cited source is a non peer-reviewed article on a catholic website, which doesn't mention the original source. The year (1978) makes it likely that this is the same book as in 1 and 2 again.
5) Thee books, all of which are non peer-reviewed.
>>6211727
>apparently you dont know how science works.
oh sweet irony

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 17:08:05 2013 No.6212008 File: 85 KB, 290x262, 1002859_567185763323160_557468596_n.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6212001 http://www.queerty.com/meth-fueled-gay-orgies-london-20130606/

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 17:09:05 2013 No.6212010 "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." Poor guy doesn't know what he's doing to himself. /pol/ is so cute when it's angry.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 17:27:05 2013 No.6212050 >>6212008 not exactly a good response to an attack on the credibility of sources, dumb ass

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 17:31:05 2013 No.6212061 >>6207234 >emotions reside in the soul, they said fuck off Plato

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 8 17:36:35 2013 No.6212073 >>6207394 yeah.. until you discover your son in a faggot thanks to your fertile wife

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 14:26:07 2013 No.6213648 Bump

Anonymous Mon Dec 9 14:29:37 2013 No.6213653
File: 25 KB, 283x309, 1386617351258.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6212073
> until you discover your son in a faggot thanks to your fertile wife
erm, don't you mean 'until you discover your son IS a faggot..."

oh actually, nevermind. same thing :D

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 14:46:07 2013 No.6213701 >>6207596 >Let me posit this one if pedophilia is a choice why do you feel the need to impact someone else´s choice?

Anonymous Mon Dec 9 14:55:07 2013 No.6213720

>>6207388
I'm homosex, and I can say assertively that homosex is not a psychological, or at least, it's not caused by society's influence on people. I felt this way since a very young age before I even knew what these feels meant, so you can take my word that a sociological explanation is out of the question.

Anonymous Mon Dec 9 14:57:08 2013 No.6213727

>"Gender identity disorder (GID) or transsexualism is defined by strong, persistent feelings of identification with the opposite gender and discomfort with one's own assigned sex. People with GID desire to live as members of the opposite sex and often dress and use mannerisms associated with the other gender. For instance, a person identified as a boy may feel and act like a girl. This is distinct from homosexuality in that homosexuals nearly always identify with their apparent sex or gender.Identity issues may manifest in a variety of different ways. For example, some people with normal genitals and secondary sex characteristics of one gender privately identify more with the other gender. Some may cross-dress, and some may actually seek sex-change surgery. Others are born with ambiguous genitalia, which can raise identity issues.Associated Features and Disorders of Gender Identity Disorder.Many individuals with gender identity disorder become socially isolated, whether by choice or through ostracization, which can contribute to low self-esteem and may lead to school aversion or even dropping out. Peer ostracism and teasing are especially common consequences for boys with the disorder."
from:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/conditions/gender-identity-disorder

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 15:00:07 2013 No.6213739 >>6213727 The funniest part is where they state that it is different from homosexuality.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 15:06:38 2013 No.6213748 >>6213739 but it is quantifiably different, you moron

Anonymous Mon Dec 9 15:08:37 2013 No.6213750

>>6207617
THAT´S FUCKING INDOCTRINATION YOU IDIOT.

Children should be raised upon a space that allows them to choose what to do, HOWEVER, sexuality is something cannot comprehend yet, because they are sexually unaware, they must be taught to follow what they are biologically, for that is what they are intended to be.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 15:09:37 2013 No.6213754 >>6213750 >intended >muh naturalistic fallacy >muh jesus

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 15:09:37 2013 No.6213756 >>6213754 >muh feelings

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 15:10:07 2013 No.6213758 >>6211737 >>6211775 >>6212001 I like the part where that retard gets called out on his bullshit and then just stops responding. Stay classy /pol/.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 15:11:07 2013 No.6213762 >>6213756 If by feelings you mean that your stupidity is so vast that it hurts my brain, then yes, muh feelings. Idiot.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 15:14:07 2013 No.6213768 >>6213754 are you saying male and female organisms are not supposed to unite to create offspring?

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 15:15:07 2013 No.6213772 >>6207582 Hmm, this seems like it would only be worthwhile evidence if you removed the child from the family with the homosexual close relatives and raised them in a straight household. Your data doesn't remove the environment variable.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 15:17:38 2013 No.6213774 >>6213768 Not every single one of them, no. Also, 'supposed to' implies some sort of destiny, or a moral 'ought to', which you cannot logically claim based on a natural phenomenon. Like I said: >muh naturalistic fallacy

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 15:21:37 2013 No.6213781 >>6207410 Call me ;)

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 15:33:07 2013 No.6213802 >>6213754 Having to resort to greentexting is really not a good sign for your argument

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 15:39:07 2013 No.6213811 >>6213802 How about you address the contents of the argument rather than the specific color of the text.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 15:54:07 2013 No.6213837 >>6207410 How can I accept Jesus if I'm a man too?

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 17:22:07 2013 No.6213995 File: 206 KB, 504x1004, 1386627759595.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Whether people are born engineers or arise as engineers from social circumstance, who are the hurting by being engineers?

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 17:23:07 2013 No.6214000 File: 140 KB, 468x939, 1386627829400.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 17:27:38 2013 No.6214009 File: 174 KB, 504x991, 1386628033992.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 17:28:07 2013 No.6214011 File: 391 KB, 504x2948, 1386628110576.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 17:30:37 2013 No.6214014 File: 87 KB, 1024x768, 1386628214847.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 17:31:07 2013 No.6214020 File: 112 KB, 1920x1200, 1386628285483.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 17:32:07 2013 No.6214025 File: 131 KB, 2048x1536, 1386628369974.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon Dec 9 17:56:08 2013 No.6214090

>>6207627
>the point is that indoctrination of children is something most people attempt to do, regardless of their beliefs.

And it's something that no one should be doing.

I fell out with Christianity because I felt like I was being indoctrinated. I tried studying religion in school but it was Christianity and minimal/non-existent discussion of other religions.

I fell out with everyone who told me what to say, do or believe because I saw the lies and "bad practice" associated with drug enforcement.

I want to see less lies and more awkward truths. "Liberals" may say they're doing their indoctrination for the "greater good" because it's a "noble" cause. This is missing the point completely, it's the unbalanced attitude and indoctrination tactics that are the problem.

I hate advertisers, especially ones that target kids.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 18:01:37 2013 No.6214100 It's obviously a mental disorder.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 18:32:37 2013 No.6214181 >>6207388 Gays can't reproduce, they are not viable

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 9 18:41:37 2013 No.6214195 >>6207449 Someone should do a study on this. Brain scan and check hormone levels of a bunch of gay men/woman, tranny men/women, and straight men/women.

Anonymous Tue Dec 10 17:02:39 2013 No.6216237

>>6206341
If the population control theory is correct than homos are the weaker ones whos genes are not strong enough too continue. So they're the weak ones of our genepool. Also by that definition space colonization will put an end to homosexuality.

Homosexuals are males that are (rightfully so) not confident enough in their manhood. They are not real man. They failed to be a man. There are two options, either become a man or run away from becoming a man and the latter is homosexuality.

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 10 20:08:22 2013 No.6216624 >>6208032 http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/blog/2013/06/identical-twin-studies-prove-homosexuality-is-not-genetic/

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 10 20:14:22 2013 No.6216643 >>6211150 i agree

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 10 20:16:52 2013 No.6216646 >>6214181 See >>6207394

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 10 20:18:52 2013 No.6216651 >>6216624 >inb4 attacking the page and not the sources

Anonymous Tue Dec 10 20:22:53 2013 No.6216665
File: 162 KB, 500x705, 1386724978769.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6212010
>if i disagree with your opinion, you are an ignorant neo nazi racist
>everything you bring up, i will claim as false because i don't like where you got the sources from
>gays are normal people who have the same amount of partners as a straight person would

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 10 20:26:53 2013 No.6216681 File: 107 KB, 648x588, 1386725196111.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6213758 he said he WAS able to find the claims quoted in the sources, you just ignored it because it hurt your liberal feelings

Anonymous Tue Dec 10 22:07:52 2013 No.6217017
File: 972 KB, 500x370, 1386731255639.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6216624
>A significant twin study among adolescents shows an even
>study among adolescents
>adolescents

gay-fag here, I dunno about these other queers, but when I was an adolescent, the last thing I ever wanted to do was admit that I am gay. Took me until the age of 21 to officially come out, I'm sorry but these studies are fucking bullshit.

>Numbers of people who have changed towards exclusive heterosexuality are greater than current numbers of bisexuals and homosexuals combined. In other words, ex-gays outnumber actual gays.

[citation needed]

>“At best genetics is a minor factor,” says Dr. Neil Whitehead, PhD. Whitehead worked for the New Zealand government as a scientific researcher for 24 years, then spent four years working for the United Nations and International Atomic Energy Agency. Most recently, he serves as a consultant to Japanese universities about the effects of radiation exposure. His PhD is in biochemistry and statistics.

I wouldn't trust this man with anything having to do with genetics. Biochemistry and genetics are vastly different from each other

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 10 22:15:23 2013 No.6217048 >>6216665 >muh degeneracy

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 10 22:17:22 2013 No.6217055 >>6216681 >Not having any male role models. >Wonder why he wants to be a woman.

Anonymous Tue Dec 10 22:20:22 2013 No.6217061

>>6216624

>orthodoxy today
>one study proves gays are choosing to sin!

The studies it references are valuable, but they don't 'prove' anything. At best they illustrate that there may be factors other than biology involved in homosexuality. It also stands against mountains of evidence, (birth order, chromosome linkage, sexually dimporphic hypothalamus, fetal androgen exposure) that suggest a strong biological component.

We're still trying to understand it and nothing is ever 100% in science, but it's safe to say that there's a strong genetic component in homosexuality.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 00:41:36 2013 No.6217430 >>6211093 Dude Papercraft and Origami Nicest board on 4chan

The great and honorable Lord Bismuth, The Sultan of Sa(...) !!oGQ7O0G/UIr Wed Dec 11 00:44:36 2013 No.6217435
File: 319 KB, 640x480, 1386740654615.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Being gay is probably genetic and epigenetic. I would't say anyone would truly want to be gay in our current society. Who the fuck wants to be harmed? Bisexuality exists as well, so now it's considered more "in" people can express it openly and have boy/girlfriends when they please which can drive up the "gay" factor by a bit.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 01:16:07 2013 No.6217473 >>6217435 I seriously doubt it's genetic, since homosexuals dont tend to have offspring... Epigenetic or brain structure modification induced by prenatal hormones or some such seems more likely

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 01:26:36 2013 No.6217489
File: 18 KB, 366x380, 1386743164512.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6217473
>since homosexuals dont tend to have offspring

maybe today, but what about 50, 100, 150, 1000+ years ago?

I grew up with kids who had one parent later come out as gay.

i hope you're trolling

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 01:38:06 2013 No.6217511 >>6217473 The homosexual gene if such a thing exists doesnt necessarily have to be activated and passed to the offspring A sibling of a homosexual person could also carry similar genes and can pass it to its offspring

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 01:45:06 2013 No.6217523

>>6217489
>maybe today, but what about 50, 100, 150, 1000+ years ago?
I said they don't "tend" to. They can, certainly, but they tend to not since they aren't interested in the opposite sex.
Why would gay people feel any different about the opposite sex 50, 100, 150, 1000+ years ago?
Are you saying that literally everyone got married and had 2.3 kids throughout all of history until only recently?

>I grew up with kids who had one parent later come out as gay.
Cool anecdotal evidence broheim.
Still doesn't help an argument that homosexuality is genetic, since gay people can have straight kids, if they do actually end up reproducing.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 01:47:06 2013 No.6217525 >>6217523 >Still doesn't help an argument that homosexuality is genetic, since gay people can have straight kids, if they do actually end up reproducing. Baldness skips a generation too, doesnt mean it cant be passed genetically

kitty !kitty/EnNg Wed Dec 11 01:51:07 2013 No.6217532

>>6207402
my professor of ecology thought that humans, like many animals, undergo effects of some intraspecific mechanisms which are supposed to affect their number, except humanity's mechanisms of regulation are more complicated since they are bio-social by their nature. like people who live in large crowded groups like huge cities have less children than people from country etc. homosexuality might be one of them. since the whole world is crowded now this becomes more and more common. she even thought that humanity will eventually decrease its number to ~500mln

anyway it's not an illness, it was disproved long ago

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 01:53:07 2013 No.6217538 >>6217532 >homosexuality might be one of them. considering almost every mammal has homosexuality in it, its not a human population thing Its strongly suggests genetics

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 01:57:38 2013 No.6217547

>>6217532
>. she even thought that humanity will eventually decrease its number to ~500mln

Highly unlikely, population decrease of that magnitude will only occur when we have severe lack of resources

Right now we have enough resources to go upto 10 bill and maybe a little higher by 2050. We will thenface the problem of consuming more resources than we actually have

either humans stop growing bigger or stop growing in number or maybe both

i can see going back to couple billion but under 1 billion seems highly unlikely unless a global catastrophic event occurs

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:07:06 2013 No.6217561 >>6207533 >Homosexuality is a disorder still haven't explained why /pol/ confirmed

kitty !kitty/EnNg Wed Dec 11 02:12:36 2013 No.6217568

>>6217538

well every mammal may have increased aggression or lowered sexual function which are common ways to regulate population number. those are just behavioral reactions and may have different reasons and different origin

>>6217547

i doubt it too. but as you can see, many countries already have negative birth rate, so the whole earth population may decrease in the future. but since 0.5 bln is a tiny number for the whole planet, the decreasing won't probably be so strong

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:13:07 2013 No.6217570 >>6217525 >Baldness skips a generation too Except it doesn't.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:15:36 2013 No.6217573 >>6207539 >naturalist fallacy >typing this from a computer

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:20:06 2013 No.6217577
File: 40 KB, 463x720, 539650_10201725005793151_1304973891_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6207388
I'm a lesbian, and to be honest I think it's genetic, along with something else. I'm not particularly smart when it comes to science (reason i come on here is to attempt to learn tiny bits of information) but i believe it's a mixture of nature and nurture.
Pic Sort of related. Just like it.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:21:06 2013 No.6217578 >>6211657 >empiricism >not rationalism fucking retard

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:24:06 2013 No.6217580

>>6217568
>well every mammal may have increased aggression or lowered sexual function which are common ways to regulate population number. those are just behavioral reactions and may have different reasons and different origin

no it seems too much of a coincidence that every mammal in every different region and environment has the same population percentage of homosexuals i.e around 10%

Thats a very strong indicator that evolution of mammals has been through that 10% homosexuality retained genetically. Homosexuality plays a bigger role than population control probably we just need to figure out what that role is

>>	kitty !kitty/EnNg Wed Dec 11 02:26:06 2013 No.6217584 >>6217580 >no it seems too much of a coincidence that every mammal in every different region and environment has the same population percentage of homosexuals i.e around 10% can you even prove this number

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:27:37 2013 No.6217585 >>6217570 it does anon Its an X recessive gene and women generally skip male pattern baldness Father (bald) ----> Daughter ----> Grandson (bald) thats how male patternbaldness works genetically

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:32:37 2013 No.6217592 >>6217473 >I seriously doubt it's genetic, since homosexuals dont tend to have offspring... NEW THREAD TOPIC: Do conservatives exhibit lower brain function?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:35:36 2013 No.6217594 File: 2.31 MB, 390x277, 1386747319512.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6217592 2:30 AM i laughed way too hard at that.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:36:37 2013 No.6217596 File: 128 KB, 1954x1783, 1386747382633.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6206341 What's your IQ?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:38:06 2013 No.6217597 >>6217592 not really before gay culture many homosexuals lived family lives with wives and children.

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:38:06 2013 No.6217598

>>6217584
>can you even prove this number

I looked it up because i remember reading some articles of such a statistic, it turns out the 10% population in the entire animal kingdom is gay is an urban myth

so i take back the 10% homosexuals exist fact

Also it turns out in the animal kingdom though homosexual activity is common it is not exclusive. that is some animals engage in homosexual activities but its not guaranteed that they will not engage in heterosexual activities

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:48:06 2013 No.6217608 >>6217592 >Do conservatives exhibit lower brain function? Nice strawman asshat.

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:48:37 2013 No.6217609

>>6217584

http://www.bidstrup.com/sodomy.htm

the site is stating homosexuality in animal kingdom is between 3.5% - 10.1%

its probably citing from the book below its recommending

no idea how the author got those numbers and what methods he used to obtain them if anyone has read that book feel free to state how that number cam to be

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:49:06 2013 No.6217613 >>6217585 [citation needed]

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:51:36 2013 No.6217614 >>6217561 It might not be a very tactful way of putting it, but I could easily see it as being a form of disorder. Hell, even my gay friend said as much.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:54:37 2013 No.6217621 >>6217592 So you're not even going to address epigenetic modifications, or hormonal effects of fetal brain development (which are by far the biggest smoking gun in any research done on this subject)... Just go back to your fucking hug-box.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:56:07 2013 No.6217624 >>6217597 There were (and are) such things as life long bachelors you know.

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 02:57:06 2013 No.6217628 [DELETED]

>>621752
>Why would gay people feel any different about the opposite sex 50, 100, 150, 1000+ years ago?

Oh I dunno, maybe crushing societal pressures. Back in the day, getting married was seen as a property exchange by the families of those getting married. If you didn't have loads of babies, you were doing a disservice to your family and your wealth.

>Are you saying that literally everyone got married and had 2.3 kids throughout all of history until only recently?

Yes I am, in fact, they probably had more like 5+ kids because so few actually made it to be adults. I know this is /sci/ but c'mon, did you even pay attention during history?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 03:00:06 2013 No.6217632 >>6217613 Fucking fuck fuck, i read about it 10 years ago looed it up turns and it out its not X or Y chromosome related, Baldness is autosomal chromosome related well atleast i am getting myself rid of urban myths

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 03:01:38 2013 No.6217634

>>6217628
>Oh I dunno, maybe crushing societal pressures. Back in the day, getting married was seen as a property exchange by the families of those getting married. If you didn't have loads of babies, you were doing a disservice to your family and your wealth.
Yeah no shit. I'm not disputing that. I even acknowledged that some gay guys probably did get married and have kids. Doesn't mean most of them did though. And it doesn't lend any credibility to the argument that it's genetic.

>Yes I am, in fact
Good job on being an idiot.

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 03:03:06 2013 No.6217637

>>6217523
>Why would gay people feel any different about the opposite sex 50, 100, 150, 1000+ years ago?

Oh I dunno, maybe crushing societal pressures. Back in the day, getting married was seen as a property exchange by the families of those getting married. If you didn't have loads of babies, you were doing a disservice to your family and your wealth.

>Are you saying that literally everyone got married and had 2.3 kids throughout all of history until only recently?

Yes I am, in fact, they probably had more like 5+ kids because so few actually made it to be adults. I know this is /sci/ but c'mon, did you even pay attention during history?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 03:12:06 2013 No.6217646 >>6217634 > Doesn't mean most of them did though based off of what? History of the human race and culture has lead me to believe that most people, regardless of sexual orientation, did reproduce. >Good job on being an idiot. insightful, really

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 03:21:36 2013 No.6217650

>>6217646
>based off of what?
Based on the fact that homosexuals find no sexual interest in the opposite sex, making them that much less likely to actually reproduce. Gee that was fucking hard.
>History of the human race and culture has lead me to believe that most people, regardless of sexual orientation, did reproduce.
You have such a narrow view of human history it would almost be sad, if it weren't so laughable.
Yeah, you're right. ALL gay people throughout history had kids. Yup. All of them.
Also, the number of kids a family tends to have depends highly on what sort of society you live in, your social class, etc. Not everybody throughout history was a working serf. Not even in agrarian societies. And not all working serfs married and had kids either.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 03:56:06 2013 No.6217700 File: 428 KB, 1000x500, 1386752207978.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6217561 how is it not a mental disorder? someone with over 1000 sexual partners isn't a normal person

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 04:05:36 2013 No.6217709 >>6217700 > over 1000 sexual partners You pulled that number out of your ass and even if it were true something being abnormal does not make it a disorder.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 04:12:06 2013 No.6217720 >>6207402 >Mental disorder So monkeys and dogs all have mental disorders?

>>	kitty !kitty/EnNg Wed Dec 11 04:12:36 2013 No.6217718 >>6217700 what mental disorder? neurosis? psychosis?

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 04:14:06 2013 No.6217725

>>6207494
Holy fucking shit this image is stupid.
>Gay sex has a higher chance of spreading aids to other gay people so I hate gay people
That is dumb as shit. By that logic you should hate people who live in certain areas because they also have higher chances of getting sickness.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 04:17:06 2013 No.6217729 >>6207494 So why do you give a shit? You aren't going to have sex with gay people. >I hate people for being sick! >Oh my god I hate blacks for having a higher chance of heart disease!

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 04:19:36 2013 No.6217732 >>6207509 >>6207521 >/pol/ will never leave Why do they infect every board? They are the new bronies.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 04:20:06 2013 No.6217734 >>6217700 because similar behaviour has been observed in other species

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 04:21:06 2013 No.6217737 >>6217720 about every species that reproduces sexually has homosexuals actually

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 04:28:36 2013 No.6217742 >>6217700 >That image I really don't get what they are trying to say. Is it saying that homosexuality is a choice? Is it trying to say that gays have mental issues not based on anything?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 04:28:36 2013 No.6217743 File: 115 KB, 257x310, 1386754102656.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Homosexuality aswell as the will to be a transgender are caused by hormonal inbalances during pregnancy. Not enough testosterone.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 04:30:06 2013 No.6217745 >>6217742 It originally says to ask a homosexual to find out why its not a mental illness. /pol/ says we wouldnt ask a mental patient whether he was sane and they wouldnt do the same to homosexuals

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 04:33:06 2013 No.6217747 >>6217745 But that isn't really proof. You can use that type of argument on anything. >Don't ask a scot if he is sane just like you wouldn't ask an insane person if he is sane

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 04:35:06 2013 No.6217750 >>6217747 it technically works for the originally argument of asking homosexuals about themselves However insanity is decided by medical professionals, homosexuality is not considered as mental illness by the professional medical community

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 05:06:06 2013 No.6217781

>>6211701
epigenetics is weird, it determines addiction, obesity, life expectancy, heart health. basically they control expression of genes without being genes and being isolated in the metric fuckton of proteins we know fuck all about instead of the piddly 10-15% we have nailed down pretty fucking solid.

i hate that it's not classified as a disease, it is by far the most socially tolerated one but it is a disease of sexual disorder. but i also opposed most artificial inseminiation not because of homosexuality but because it by-passes a selection event important for progression of healthy genes and can lead to a prevelance of basic cell systematics. that and it will lead to human beings as monocultures in response with perfect boring genes and eliminate the other half of evolution, mutation.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 05:19:07 2013 No.6217798 >>6217781 >>6217781 >that and it will lead to human beings as monocultures in response with perfect boring genes and eliminate the other half of evolution, mutation. >implying artificial insemination can stop human evolution Life finds a way.jpg

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 10:10:36 2013 No.6218288 >>6217720 monkeys and dogs hump trees and pillows too

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 10:18:36 2013 No.6218307 >>6217737 Is yeast homosexual?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 10:19:06 2013 No.6218312 >>6217743 That would turn the dudes into women, not just fuck up their mind. >What is androgen insensitivity syndrome

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 10:23:36 2013 No.6218316 >>6218307 yeast reproduces sexually?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 10:23:36 2013 No.6218317 >>6217798 >Implying life is alive >lehigherconsciousness face.jpg

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 10:24:06 2013 No.6218318 >>6218316 Yes.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 10:27:07 2013 No.6218324 >>6218317 >Implying life is alive i didnt meant to imply that , it was supposed to be a metaphor that evolution will happen and not stop despite changes in the way of insemination

Triple Stem Ph.d Wed Dec 11 10:51:06 2013 No.6218363
File: 1.55 MB, 3000x1059, 1386777091634.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6207410
>>6207410
Buddhist atheist here

I'm proud of Christians and their mission to remove faggot

Being a faggot is sexual misconduct according to my religion.

Continue the good work

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 10:52:06 2013 No.6218365

<span class="math">\underline{\bf WOULD~YOU~FUCKERS~PLEASE~STOP~BUMPING~THIS~SHIT~THREAD?}[/spoiler]

/pol/ is getting the better of you idiots. His sources have been discredited, his logic refuted, and every time this happens the thread drops from the front page and he bumps it again the next day and the shit starts all over again. Come on, is it that hard to see the fucker's just trolling?

And if it wasn't obvious, these are rhetorical questions. I don't actually want you to answer them. Now move on to an actual science thread. I'll do the same.

>inb4 feelings hurt
>inb4 insult
>inb4 any other fallacious trolling

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 10:55:07 2013 No.6218372
File: 204 KB, 829x570, Screen Shot 2013-12-11 at 10.54.08 AM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6218365
>His sources have been discredited, his logic refuted,
wut? I'm pretty sure that this thread has confirmed it's a neurological defect caused by the environment (epigenetics) or a hostile womb (hormonal dysfunction).

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 10:56:07 2013 No.6218373 >>6218365 If you are so mad about it, hide and get the fuck out. Don't reply to this shit if you don't want to, but if you're not joining the debate you can just fuck off.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 10:58:06 2013 No.6218375 >>6218372 >defect Unwarranted claim, shitbird. Left-handedness also coincide with neural differences compared to control, doesn't mean it's pathological.

Anonymous Wed Dec 11 11:00:06 2013 No.6218377

>>6218363
Not only it's wrong to religions, but it is a concern of medical science since this disorder affects one of the characteristic of lifeforms: The ability to reproduce.

Think of homosexuals as suicides. Do suicides have a mental illness? Why don't let them do what they want and let them kill themselves?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 11:02:06 2013 No.6218379 >>6218377 >The ability to reproduce >implying homosexuality affects fertility >implying reproduction is the only means of spreading your genes

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 11:09:10 2013 No.6218385 >>6218379 It affects the will of reproducing. Faggots don't seek fertile mates anymore, therefore they die without passing their genes. >implying reproduction is the only means of spreading your genes Are you implying we can divide ourselves?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 11:11:06 2013 No.6218386 >>6218375 left handedness doesnt interfere with basic biological functions such as reproduction or sustenance.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 11:11:06 2013 No.6218387 >>6218385 >Are you implying we can divide ourselves? Obviously you've never taken biology past high school. Read some papers (or even the wikipedia page) about kin selection and come back when you've realized how what you're saying is retarded.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 11:12:06 2013 No.6218388 >>6218386 We've been over this, that's not what makes something pathological or not. Read back. I'm out.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 11:15:06 2013 No.6218392 >>6218373 You fuckers won't listen, so the thread is now sagebombed. It'll die a slow death, enjoy.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 11:17:06 2013 No.6218395 >>6218392 What is sagebomb?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 11:21:06 2013 No.6218400 >>6218395 This thread cannot be bumped anymore. Welcome to 4chan, friend.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 11:23:07 2013 No.6218404 >>6218400 Well, i guess i will make a new thread then.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 11:26:06 2013 No.6218410 >>6218404 I'll ban you if I see one.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 11:28:06 2013 No.6218412 >>6218410 >Implying you're a mod. Top lel. You can't even delete this thread.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 17:18:18 2013 No.6219080 >>6218365 jew mad?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 11 17:20:23 2013 No.6219086 File: 12 KB, 251x229, 1386800427053.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6218410

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 12 02:30:57 2013 No.6220376 >>6207394 Maybe it is only supposed to come out for the females but somehow mutated to come out in the males and cause gayness

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 12 04:45:56 2013 No.6220531 >>6218386 who said homosexuals cant reproduce? they have been doing so since the dawn of time, they just dont need to now since there is less social pressure for them to do so with gay acceptance

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math