I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

[Sip]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

"The Earth is billions of years old" is NOT anti-religion rhetoric.
"Evolution" is not anti-religion rhetoric.
"Homosexuality is not learned behavior" is NOT anti-religion rhetoric.
(these are facts supported by evidence... lots and lots of it)

These are the kinds of things Siggie has been saying and you are dismissing them as anti-religion rhetoric.

What is anti-scientific rhetoric is you saying things like abuse leads to homosexuality. When you say something like that, you need to explain where you are getting this information. How it was collected, studied, verified, etc. That's the difficult science part. But the more fundamental issue here is, EVEN if abuse leads to homosexuality, that does not mean homosexuality is only a result of abuse.

I will give you a very simple example which I am sure you will again not understand but I will give it anyway:

Siggie is saying something like some kids love the taste of tomatoes.
You say oh but wait, kids that are abused with tomatoes inserted in their anus start liking the taste of tomatoes and some kids in Taiwan are injected with genetically engineered hormones to make them like tomatoes so the tomato farmers can make a profit so tomato liking should be frowned upon by Armenians because of these specific instances.

So what is the main point again?

Main point is that there is a lot more evidence about homosexuality being a biological thing rather than just some learned behavior due to abuse etc. The real problem is you are used to thinking of homosexuals as some sort of weirdos that show up wearing boa feathers and tiny colorful underwear and march around on TV where the large majority of homosexuals in the world look and act like pretty much everyone else ... so you don't even get to know their sexual preferences. You say you are offended by the ones that throw their sexuality in your face on tv or in life but that doesn't mean that's all the homosexuals in the world.

[KanadaHye]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

"The Earth is billions of years old" is NOT anti-religion rhetoric.
"Evolution" is not anti-religion rhetoric.
"Homosexuality is not learned behavior" is NOT anti-religion rhetoric.
(these are facts supported by evidence... lots and lots of it)

What pertains to my life is how old human life is because I am human. If I was a dinosaur then I'd worry about why I went extinct. There is lots of evidence as to why civilizations went extinct in the past and it would only make sense to my survival to learn why they went extinct.

Evolution doesn't mean people evolved from lower life forms. That is bogus science.

Homosexuality IS IN FACT learned behaviour. What isn't learned is the amount of estrogen and testosterone someone has in their body.

So what is the main point again?

Main point is that there is a lot more evidence about homosexuality being a biological thing rather than just some learned behavior due to abuse etc. The real problem is you are used to thinking of homosexuals as some sort of weirdos that show up wearing boa feathers and tiny colorful underwear and march around on TV where the large majority of homosexuals in the world look and act like pretty much everyone else ... so you don't even get to know their sexual preferences. You say you are offended by the ones that throw their sexuality in your face on tv or in life but that doesn't mean that's all the homosexuals in the world.

There really is no evidence swaying either way or else we wouldn't be having this conversation. At least I'm claiming there is some percentage of the population that is born with homosexual tendencies but other parts are due to cultural exposure and learned behaviour.

[KanadaHye]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

Funny how I mentioned China and I just ran across this video. The women broadcasters were laughing it up on CNN.

[Sip]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

There really is no evidence swaying either way or else we wouldn't be having this conversation. At least I'm claiming there is some percentage of the population that is born with homosexual tendencies but other parts are due to cultural exposure and learned behaviour.

Actually there is a LOT of evidence to one side of the conversation and I still can't believe this is a conversation that really goes on!

Homosexuality IS IN FACT learned behaviour.

Why do we see homosexual behavior in animals other than humans? Who do they learn from?

[KanadaHye]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

Actually there is a LOT of evidence to one side of the conversation and I still can't believe this is a conversation that really goes on!

So you think culture has nothing to do with it and every person is born with their programming? You knew to be a straight Armenian male from the day you were born and your life couldn't have possibly gone down a different path if you were born in Brazil or Thailand?

Why do we see homosexual behavior in animals other than humans? Who do they learn from?

They are animals and have limited learning capability. Why do Armenians raised among Africans and Mexicans act African or Mexican? Why can't they remain Armenian? Culture is a tremendous part of human behaviour. Again, I don't claim that there aren't those that are born with tendencies.

[Siggie]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

I don't think anyone's undervaluing the tremendous tremendous influence of environment and culture on shaping our identities, attitudes, or behavior. The evidence, on this specific topic of sexual orientation just points to a large biological component.

[KanadaHye]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

I don't think anyone's undervaluing the tremendous tremendous influence of environment and culture on shaping our identities, attitudes, or behavior. The evidence, on this specific topic of sexual orientation just points to a large biological component.

Define the biological component. I'm curious as to what you think is biologically capable of making someone be attracted to the same sex. I think it's far more psychological.

[Sip]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

Again, I don't claim that there aren't those that are born with tendencies.

Homosexuality IS IN FACT learned behaviour.

There you go really confusing me again bud. You have said both these things. They can't both be true. So which one is false?

[KanadaHye]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

There you go really confusing me again bud. You have said both these things. They can't both be true. So which one is false?

There are two ways to look at it. Being attracted and acting on the attraction are two separate things. If we acted on our thoughts, most of us would be in prison.

If there is a psychological component then it could be treated through some sort of correctional facility. If there is a biological component due to hormonal imbalance then that could be treated as well. As far as scientists know, there is no gay gene or chromosome that causes this. For cases where people claim they are trapped in the body of the opposite sex then there would have to be a large psychological component.

Wouldn't you say there has been an increase as of late that may point the finger to single parenthood? For example, if a boy was raised sheltered by his mother and never had exposure to a father figure and wasn't exposed much to girls socially in his childhood, don't you think that might have an effect on him psychologically?

We simply don't know what contributes to this phenomenon but statistically it's not in the "norm" but it does seem to be increasing.

[Siggie]

Re: I am Armenian and GAY. Not feminine, just masculine.

Define the biological component. I'm curious as to what you think is biologically capable of making someone be attracted to the same sex. I think it's far more psychological.

We do not have a complete understanding of the intricacies of the body yet. This work is ongoing... We have only relatively recently mapped the human genome even. Not being able to point to how the biology influences orientation (and truthfully, they may have an idea...I haven't looked) does not preclude knowing that it is influenced by biology. I cited you a couple twin studies previously. That's how we find out... We look at monozygotic (identical) twins, dizygotic (paternal) twins, siblings, etc. and compare the incidence of them sharing the same sexual orientation and they calculate the influence of heredity that way. Another way (though harder to do) is to look at monozygotic twins raised together or raised apart and see the difference there. If their sexuality tends to be the same regardless of whether they were raised together (largely same environmental influences) then it points to biology/heredity.
This is not new... we have put to the nature/nurture question to LOTS of different things (personality/dispositional traits, alcoholism, intelligence, etc.)

Your problem is this: You think about something and decide how you think it should be and then you stop there without looking into whether it actually IS that way. You don't consider the possibility that there's something you don't know or that you could be mistaken. We learn far more if we're not sooooo attached to our beliefs. We should be more flexible in our thoughts and ready to reevaluate in the face of new information.

There are two ways to look at it. Being attracted and acting on the attraction are two separate things. If we acted on our thoughts, most of us would be in prison.

If there is a psychological component then it could be treated through some sort of correctional facility. If there is a biological component due to hormonal imbalance then that could be treated as well. As far as scientists know, there is no gay gene or chromosome that causes this. For cases where people claim they are trapped in the body of the opposite sex then there would have to be a large psychological component.

Wouldn't you say there has been an increase as of late that may point the finger to single parenthood? For example, if a boy was raised sheltered by his mother and never had exposure to a father figure and wasn't exposed much to girls socially in his childhood, don't you think that might have an effect on him psychologically?

We simply don't know what contributes to this phenomenon but statistically it's not in the "norm" but it does seem to be increasing.

I will give you that acting on our feelings is another thing, however if you cannot change who you are attracted to, then you're really just setting yourself up for misery and heartbreak (for yourself and potential partners) by "pretending" to be attracted to the opposite sex and attempting to have romantic relationships in the complete absence of any physical attraction.
As I said, if it were a choice and if it's possible to "override the gay" then it stands to reason that the reverse would be possible as well. That is why I have repeatedly asked you whether you can "override the hetero"...

There are such correctional facilities (lots run by religious organizations) and they are unsuccessful. This alone indicates that it's not possible then.

Just because there hasn't been a single gene identified, doesn't mean that we can't tell that it is influenced by heredity. I explained this more in response to your previous post above.

We have known for a long time, for example, that Alzheimer's has a significant hereditary component, but it is only fairly recently that two potential genetic markers (still not whole picture) that can increase risk ~8x have been identified: certain versions of the APOE and APP genes. Long before they found the genes there were other things (identified by means similar to what I described above) and also the curious fact that all those with Down's Syndrome developed early-onset (different biological cause than late-onset) Alzheimer's if they lived long enough (this points to chromosome 21).

No, I wouldn't say there's been an increase as of late that points to single parenthood. If you have found such research, please cite it because I would like to know about it and read the article. I would find this surprising and important to know because I am aware of some research comparing the children of gay couples with the children of heterosexual couples and the gay couples are no more likely to have gay children than the heterosexual couples (I believe it was limited to adopted children if memory serves).

I think before we can even look for something to attribute an increase to though, we must first establish that there is in fact an increase.