Liberal Forum

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 1:13 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 1:13 pm

That is just dumb for a dude to identify as gay when they aren't. They could be getting laid by hot girls, but they decide they want to be different instead. Idiots.

A different perspective is my old supervisor told me as an 11yo, the 16yo neighbor girl would corner him and force him to have sex with her multiple times...he said he was scared straight gay...I'm thinking she must've been real homely, greta thunberg like...  

 
 

Cannonpointer » 27 Jan 2024, 7:11 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 7:11 pm

It depends on what prison you picked it up in.

Some people are just born to suck cock. Others develop a taste for it. Still others are manhandled on the mainline and forced to take it RITA (right in the the ***).

Some men are born gay, some men become gay, and some men have gayness thrust upon them.

I think that about covers it

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 12:23 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 12:23 pm

1. I personally never chose to be straight. I just always was and still am. There was never any conscious effort that I made to commit to heterosexuality. Therefore, it seems logical that homosexuals didn't make a conscious effort to commit to their sexuality either. 

You never chose to refrain from robbing banks, or to refrain from being a spree killer. Does this mean bank robbers and spree killers were just born that way? If not, the above argument fails.

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 12:23 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 12:23 pm

2. If social environment does indeed persuade one to choose one or the other, then it would seem reasonable to observe that the siblings of gay people should also be gay, given that they were all brought up in the same environment. However, this is not the case. Yes, there are examples of course, but it is rare. 

That is false. Let's take a foot fetishist. Perhaps that fellow saw a sex woman at a very young age on the telly, and there was a lingering focus on her feet. He felt his first sexual attraction, and then was treated to a lingering view of feminine feet in spike heels. And let us say that he had a twin, who was away from the telly when this occurred - making them sandwiches.

Who made the sandwiches that day had more to do with which twin had a foot fetish and which twin did not than any genetic programming. If gayness is genetic, we WILL find out, once we have mapped the human genome.

Gotta run - be right back.

Okay, I'm back. Hey, while I was gone, I found out that we already DID map the human genome. So "born that way" is retarded. Never go full retard, son.

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 12:23 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 12:23 pm

The point is that with all the variables that come with attraction, we have a difficult time nailing down why. Thus, it would be reasonable to say the same about sexual orientation.

Then why arbitrarily and unscientifically assign it to genetics, when we have mapped the **** genome and found no gene or set of genes that predicts dirt daubing?

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 12:23 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 12:23 pm

I have always maintained that homosexuality is not a choice. I say that for a few reasons:

1. I personally never chose to be straight. I just always was and still am. There was never any conscious effort that I made to commit to heterosexuality. Therefore, it seems logical that homosexuals didn't make a conscious effort to commit to their sexuality either. 

2. If social environment does indeed persuade one to choose one or the other, then it would seem reasonable to observe that the siblings of gay people should also be gay, given that they were all brought up in the same environment. However, this is not the case. Yes, there are examples of course, but it is rare. 

3. If we take 'attraction' on a general level, just broadly speaking, it is hard to nail down why we are attracted to certain physical traits, be it for straight or gay people. I love redheads, but not blondes for some reason. I don't know why, redheads get my dick hard, but blondes don't really do it for me. Yet, some love blonds but find red heads disgusting. Some men love 'asses' more than 'tits', some don't. Some women love broad shoulders, some don't. Some like tall, thin, others like thick and curvy. Whatever. The point is that with all the variables that come with attraction, we have a difficult time nailing down why. Thus, it would be reasonable to say the same about sexual orientation.

Count me in... @Skans  can attest to that... I got the shudders just reading redhead narratives...
 

ROG62 » 27 Jan 2024, 7:20 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 7:20 pm

Count me in... @Skans  can attest to that... I got the shudders just reading redhead narratives...

You know what they say about gingers. You move the "i" to the other side of the "n," and put the first "g" with the second, you get a whole other word. 

ROG62 » 27 Jan 2024, 7:14 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 7:14 pm

A different perspective is my old supervisor told me as an 11yo, the 16yo neighbor girl would corner him and force him to have sex with her multiple times...he said he was scared straight gay...I'm thinking she must've been real homely, greta thunberg like...

When I was 15, there was a report of three women raping a man they held captive for several days. I was dumbfounded. I expressed doubt that a woman could possibly rape a man. The logistics just did not make sense to my 15 year old sense. 

My grandmother set me straight in the matter. She said, "They scared him stiff."  
 

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 1:13 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 1:13 pm

That is just dumb for a dude to identify as gay when they aren't. They could be getting laid by hot girls, but they decide they want to be different instead. Idiots.

That is an unsophisticated view of the matter. Many gays are narcissists, and they want to have sex with themselves. So they find a fellow who roughly matches them, and they have sex with him. 

I'm not saying that all gayness is born of narcissism - but some is, I suspect. Then there is just the biological need for physical intimacy. Some men lack the social skills to make it with women. They take what they can get. Then there is the matter of taste being fluid. A fellow with no particular gay tendencies, exposed to enough gay images, can develop a taste for what he would never have wanted, but for that exposure.

Look, Hollywood took America from fetishizing mom-bods to fetishizing daughter-bods in a generation. Sexual tastes are CLEARLY malleable - unless you care to take the yea side in the preposterous debate whether shoe fetishes are "genetic."
 

ROG62 » 27 Jan 2024, 7:14 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 7:14 pm

A different perspective is my old supervisor told me as an 11yo, the 16yo neighbor girl would corner him and force him to have sex with her multiple times...he said he was scared straight gay...I'm thinking she must've been real homely, greta thunberg like...  

 
 

Murdock's given avatar he cannot change.

Cannonpointer » 27 Jan 2024, 7:20 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 7:20 pm

You never chose to refrain from robbing banks, or to refrain from being a spree killer. Does this mean bank robbers and spree killers were just born that way? If not, the above argument fails.

 

This has no connection in the OP whatsoever on any level. 

That is false. Let's take a foot fetishist. Perhaps that fellow saw a sex woman at a very young age on the telly, and there was a lingering focus on her feet. He felt his first sexual attraction, and then was treated to a lingering view of feminine feet in spike heels. And let us say that he had a twin, who was away from the telly when this occurred - making them sandwiches.

Okay, I'm back. Hey, while I was gone, I found out that we already DID map the human genome. So "born that way" is retarded. Never go full retard, son.

Could you expand on this, or provide a link please?

Then why arbitrarily and unscientifically assign it to genetics, when we have mapped the **** genome and found no gene or set of genes that predicts dirt daubing?

Just because they haven't found a homo gene that causes it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It just means they haven't found it. There is still a lot of research going on. 

ROG62 » 27 Jan 2024, 7:14 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 7:14 pm

A different perspective is my old supervisor told me as an 11yo, the 16yo neighbor girl would corner him and force him to have sex with her multiple times...he said he was scared straight gay...I'm thinking she must've been real homely, greta thunberg like...

Damn. I guess she was lonely.   

Cannonpointer » 27 Jan 2024, 7:23 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 7:23 pm

You know what they say about gingers. You move the "i" to the other side of the "n," and put the first "g" with the second, you get a whole other word. 

Right is opposite wrong and left at the same time on a horizontal plane separated by a vertical perpendicular axis in the middle of a circle or square equal up and down lengths as the 4 sides or the circumference of the circle/sphere.

Opposites can be adjacent in every direction as well as opposing sides of results center balanced as displaced in time adapting to the moment here geographically different in geometrical numbers adapting as displaced in 5 relative geological generations gaps here now intellectually typecast as race, creed, color, national origin, gender displacement, generation gap achieved after birth, rank in social order denying now is eternity and genetics actually eternally separates ancestors populating space ancestrally here, now.

Again ideologies developed by ancestors sharing space for generations lived so far. Vocabulary is an artificial knowledge used to communicate ideas between active reproductions evolving as generation gaps to an ever changing numbers living specifically here now.

Mind over matter ignores matter changing forms shaped as displaced eroding and decomposing after arrival in inorganic outcomes and ancestral decomposition of dead relatives delivering a next generation of replacements before dying.

Back to homosexual instincts brain sterilizes fertile people from adding another generation with birth defects from misaligned genetic chromosomes. Something inside out nobody can see outside in.

So they were born that way or nurtured that way after birth by their social environment of alternate realities working against one another to be the last reality inheriting the earth intellectually speaking.

Means, motives, methods historically used globally in every separate village and ancestral lineage every generation since dawn of civilization training brains to perform as civic minded people thinking beyond ada[pting as displaced or the word "tomorrow"..

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 12:43 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 12:43 pm

Exactly. I don't know why the hell anyone would want to pretend that they are gay. Who the hell does that? Maybe it's for the attention because they will be different. I don't know.

The notion that they are EITHER "pretending," OR they are "born that way," is predicated on no particular argument that I have seen you make. You just blithely make that assumption, with no backing. You have shown no genetic component.

The pretense that gays are taking the path of most resistance is likewise shoddy. I can absolutely promise you that being straight in San Francisco is the path of greater resistance, compared to being gay. And my experience is 25 years old - I seriously doubt it is less true today. No genetic component - just a social one. 

But leave SF out of it - its an outlier (less and less and less as time goes on, but an outlier). Let's just talk about resistance. The assumption that the only resistance gay people face or straight people face is being associated with the taboo - the less and less and less taboo as time goes on, mind you - is likewise predicated on assumptions only: no argument I have seen you make. The fact is, the inability to score ****** is an enormous resistance to remaining hetero. People need sexual intimacy. In an atomized and dysfunctional late capitalist society, many young men are incapable of attracting a girl - and are thereby rendered accessible to homosexual advances. No genetic component. 

For that matter, if an adolescent male is offered a hand job by anyone even SLIGHTLY adroit, he's **** taking it. Any pervy uncle can get his hand on the cock of a young boy who doesn't have male protection and direction. And now, that boy associates men and sex - for the rest of his life. No genetic component. 

You are arguing for a genetic component, but none of your arguments point to one. They just perambulate about, kicking over a logical fallacy here and an undefended assumption there. You have voiced an opinion - not an argument. And you know what they say about opinions:

Yours is incorrect.
 
 

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 7:44 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 7:44 pm

This has no connection in the OP whatsoever on any level. 

None that you discern, you mean.

Other people's experience may vary.

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 7:44 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 7:44 pm

Could you expand on this, or provide a link please?

https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=in%20wha ... ome%3F&l=1

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 7:44 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 7:44 pm

Just because they haven't found a homo gene that causes it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It just means they haven't found it. There is still a lot of research going on.

Yes yes - desperately going on.

We've mapped the genome, son. There is no gay gene. Not in science.

I'm confident that pseudo-science has an argument for what you suggest, and if you google hard enough you can find it.

Cannonpointer » 27 Jan 2024, 7:57 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 7:57 pm

None that you discern, you mean.

Other people's experience may vary.

https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=in%20wha ... ome%3F&l=1

Yes yes - desperately going on.

We've mapped the genome, son. There is no gay gene. Not in science.

I'm confident that pseudo-science has an argument for what you suggest, and if you google hard enough you can find it.

Which category of science? Evolution theory, genetic modulation of natural chromosomes to change characteristics of next generation gaps added or better yet Psychiatry training brains to mind ideas cradle to grave for generations added until extinction.

History shows the behavioral patterns of just that going on in each alternate reality of the humanities present.

Nostradamus'omh » 27 Jan 2024, 8:01 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 8:01 pm

Which category of science? Evolution theory, genetic modulation of natural chromosomes to change characteristics of next generation gaps added.

That's only one option. If I have to choose, you have to give me three. That's the rule. 

I'm going to choose that one - but I should still get options. 

If you could, please put that one in the middle, because I like it and I intend to pick it - but I always pick the middle option.
 
 

Cannonpointer » 27 Jan 2024, 7:52 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 7:52 pm

The notion that they are EITHER "pretending," OR they are "born that way," is predicated on no particular argument that I have seen you make. You just blithely make that assumption, with no backing. You have shown no genetic component.

The pretense that gays are taking the path of most resistance is likewise shoddy. I can absolutely promise you that being straight in San Francisco is the path of greater resistance, compared to being gay. And my experience is 25 years old - I seriously doubt it is less true today. No genetic component - just a social one. 

But leave SF out of it - its an outlier (less and less and less as time goes on, but an outlier). Let's just talk about resistance. The assumption that the only resistance gay people face or straight people face is being associated with the taboo - the less and less and less taboo as time goes on, mind you - is likewise predicated on assumptions only: no argument I have seen you make. The fact is, the inability to score ****** is an enormous resistance to remaining hetero. People need sexual intimacy. In an atomized and dysfunctional late capitalist society, many young men are incapable of attracting a girl - and are thereby rendered accessible to homosexual advances. No genetic component. 

For that matter, if an adolescent male is offered a hand job by anyone even SLIGHTLY adroit, he's **** taking it. Any pervy uncle can get his hand on the cock of a young boy who doesn't have male protection and direction. And now, that boy associates men and sex - for the rest of his life. No genetic component. 

You are arguing for a genetic component, but none of your arguments point to one. They just perambulate about, kicking over a logical fallacy here and an undefended assumption there. You have voiced an opinion - not an argument. And you know what they say about opinions:

Yours is incorrect.

I never argued for a genetic component. I even admitted that science has never discovered a gene relating to homosexuality.  I argued that just because research hasn't discovered such a gene doesn't mean that it isn't there. There are too many inconsistencies, in real life, that point to it being a choice. My Op expands on those views. 

Cannonpointer » 27 Jan 2024, 7:57 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 7:57 pm

https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=in%20wha ... ome%3F&l=1


 

          Now that's funny. 

Cannonpointer » 27 Jan 2024, 8:03 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 8:03 pm

That's only one option. If I have to choose, you have to give me three. That's the rule. 

I'm going to choose that one - but I should still get options. 

If you could, please put that one in the middle, because I like it and I intend to pick it - but I always pick the middle option.
 
 

adapt or become extinct is a universal effect on everything affected while reproductively alive now. Evolving process balances what exists between extreme interpretations. Expanding combinations of either periodic elements that erode or DNA changing chromosomes of each replacement added their entire ancestry as the new arrival as a one time event of ancestral displacement.

I watch that pattern happen with my own body transforming since birth that arrived when conceived from nothing as myself existed before or since that conception.

Time isn't my ally anymore than reasonable doubt is evolving from the idea anything else is possible..

Vegas » 27 Jan 2024, 8:03 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 8:03 pm

I never argued for a genetic component. I even admitted that science has never discovered a gene relating to homosexuality.  I argued that just because research hasn't discovered such a gene doesn't mean that it isn't there. There are too many inconsistencies, in real life, that point to it being a choice. My Op expands on those views.

This would be true, if we had not in fact mapped the human genome 20 years ago and found no gay gene.

There is no gay gene, son. There are no gay babies. Or trans babies. 

Cannonpointer » 27 Jan 2024, 8:10 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024, 8:10 pm

This would be true, if we had not in fact mapped the human genome 20 years ago and found no gay gene.

There is no gay gene, son. There are no gay babies. Or trans babies. 

Nobody knows what that gene looks like comparing race, creed, color, national origin, ideologies ancestry held for hundreds of generation gaps over thousands of years by any calendar.