quote:

Originally posted by MeLLyMeL I want my boys to be into sports and stuff.. not barbies!

But what if your boys want barbies? Are you going to make them get into sports and then they'll grow up confused because of what they feel internally is counter to what you enforced them to externally and then they'll end up coming out of the closet after they're married and try to overcompensate by the time they are 55 by being one of those fat ugly gay guys that prowls bathrooms at airports or Bourbon Street during Mardi Gras taking pictures of pee pee?

Do us all a favor and give your boy a barbie

___________________
www.facebook.com/DigitalSixable
www.soundcloud.com/DigitalSixable

quote:

Originally posted by Jake Benson But they were both raised in the same house by the same parents (not different environments). How did one end up growing affinity towards barbies? If anything this case study does not prove either nature or nurture. I'm betting there's a pre-natal somethin somethin involved. Like if the mom eats/drinks too much of one thing, it puts in an imbalance of chemicals/hormones into the fetus which makes it gay?

Genetics stops at the formation of the zygote. (once the sperm and the egg joint to form the first cell in which the baby is made up from. The code is there and thats where the genetic factor stops. Anything after that is nurture. Circumstances in the whomb i could be a huge factor, but its not genetic anymore

quote:

Shamelessly taken from Wikipedia regarding identical twins: "Their traits and physical appearances are not exactly the same; although they have identical DNA, environmental conditions both inside the womb and throughout their lives influence the switching on and off of various genes." So it could also be a combination of both. Obviously it's not just "nurture" because if that were true, then gay people would chose not to be gay under circumstances where being gay is not allowed (i.e. Iran where punishment is death). So I'm betting on this "genetic switch" interaction with environment. oh god...have I turned my c0r thread into a PDD thread?

True genes can switch on and off but if that were true a genetic marker could be easily found to determine homosexual or not. In nature homosexuality is predominantley due to a lack of a mate. I would compare it to fetishes. Some guys like really fat girls, some like them skinny, its preference and upbringing thats perhaps subconcious or learned.

If he is encouraged to paint his nails pink (not discouraged) and play with barbies this would be a huge factor in determinign his sexuality.

quote:

But if that were true don't you think there'd be an equal amount of gays vs straights because any given child has an equal chance of being exposed to either sex?

The main purpose of an organism is to reproduce and spread their genes. Whether it be through mutualism or individuality the facts remain. animals have been on this planet long enough to develope the capability to reproduce and spread their genes. The genetics code for a male or a female depending on their sex chromosomes. Since humanity and our lives and brains are more developed and succeptible to more learning, homosexual behaviour has a better opportunity to be learned.

Now its possible that genes can turn off and on to amplify homosexuality and certain hormones that may be linked to it, but brain developement and learning would perhaps be a much greater factor. Think about critical learning age. Those people who don't learn to read by the time they are in grade 2 may never ever learn to read and or have a significantly harder time to learn. This is because their brain has already been wired in a certain method that they will have to learn that skill through that specific wiring.

quote:

Same concept with jail inmates. Grossssssss.....

once you go black, you never go back?

This is exactly why I will not let my kids watch Will and Grace

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Slylee oh well, different strokes different vaginas

Some dance to remember ~ Some dance to forget

quote:

Originally posted by Jake Benson But what if your boys want barbies? Are you going to make them get into sports and then they'll grow up confused because of what they feel internally is counter to what you enforced them to externally and then they'll end up coming out of the closet after they're married and try to overcompensate by the time they are 55 by being one of those fat ugly gay guys that prowls bathrooms at airports or Bourbon Street during Mardi Gras taking pictures of pee pee? Do us all a favor and give your boy a barbie

What if your boy wants to be a hunter like jaguar paw and hunt the forests like his father before him.. would you give him a spear?

quote:

Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit Genetics stops at the formation of the zygote. (once the sperm and the egg joint to form the first cell in which the baby is made up from. The code is there and thats where the genetic factor stops. Anything after that is nurture. Circumstances in the whomb i could be a huge factor, but its not genetic anymore

But nurture influences and onset and offset of certain genes. Perhaps one kid got over or underexposure to a chemical that was supposed to help turn on or off a certain gene. So it might not be genes, but expression or lack of expression of genes and influences sexual orientation. Question: are there such things are identical female/male twins? (I dunno the answer just asking)

quote:

True genes can switch on and off but if that were true a genetic marker could be easily found to determine homosexual or not.

Don't give the human race that much credit. It could be a combination of genes. We still haven't found out all the genes or deformed proteins determines schizophrenia but that doesn't mean schizophrenia is learned.

quote:

In nature homosexuality is predominantley due to a lack of a mate.

That is one explanation in nature and is one instance of gayness. But how about human nature? People become gay even if they are raised solely by their mother. This seems counter to your "nature" example.

quote:

If he is encouraged to paint his nails pink (not discouraged) and play with barbies this would be a huge factor in determinign his sexuality.

He asked for a barbie when he was 18 months. I don't think his mom is making him gay. He has a natural inclination to do gay things.

quote:

The main purpose of an organism is to reproduce and spread their genes. Whether it be through mutualism or individuality the facts remain. animals have been on this planet long enough to develope the capability to reproduce and spread their genes. The genetics code for a male or a female depending on their sex chromosomes. Since humanity and our lives and brains are more developed and succeptible to more learning, homosexual behaviour has a better opportunity to be learned.

Here's your argument used for another subject to manifest it's fallacious nature:

"The main purpose of sight is to see in order to survive by keeping oneself out of danger. Animals have been on this planet long enough to develop the capacity to see clearly and spread this ability to detect the external world accurately through their genes. Since humanity and our lives and brains are more developed and susceptible to more learning, near-sightedness has a better opportunity to be learned."

quote:

Now its possible that genes can turn off and on to amplify homosexuality and certain hormones that may be linked to it, but brain developement and learning would perhaps be a much greater factor. Think about critical learning age. Those people who don't learn to read by the time they are in grade 2 may never ever learn to read and or have a significantly harder time to learn. This is because their brain has already been wired in a certain method that they will have to learn that skill through that specific wiring.

I could buy this, but then how does one learn to be "straight" early on in critical age? And what about those people who don't realize they're gay until they're well into their 20s?

___________________
www.facebook.com/DigitalSixable
www.soundcloud.com/DigitalSixable

quote:

Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit What if your boy wants to be a hunter like jaguar paw and hunt the forests like his father before him.. would you give him a spear?

No because I don't live in 18th century America and live in the city. How many boys do you know grow up in the city with the urge at 18 months to retreat to the forest to hunt creatures?

___________________
www.facebook.com/DigitalSixable
www.soundcloud.com/DigitalSixable

quote:

Originally posted by Jake Benson But what if your boys want barbies? Are you going to make them get into sports and then they'll grow up confused because of what they feel internally is counter to what you enforced them to externally and then they'll end up coming out of the closet after they're married and try to overcompensate by the time they are 55 by being one of those fat ugly gay guys that prowls bathrooms at airports or Bourbon Street during Mardi Gras taking pictures of pee pee? Do us all a favor and give your boy a barbie

Fine.. they won't have to play sports. But at 9 years old I will not let them paint their fingernails pink.

No way.

If they want to at 15 and so on.. then go right ahead.

___________________
Although you are far away
I know you'll always be
Near to me
Near to me

R.I.P. DarkAngel 12-16-o9

quote:

Originally posted by Ania_xox This is exactly why I will not let my kids watch Will and Grace

No one should let their kids watch Will and Grace. That's an annoying show.

quote:

Originally posted by MeLLyMeL Fine.. they won't have to play sports. But at 9 years old I will not let them paint their fingernails pink. No way. If they want to at 15 and so on.. then go right ahead.

Let's negotiate. Let them do it at 12.

Fyi encourage them to play sports. My mom never encouraged me and I felt like such a pansy. Everyone should play sports. =)

___________________
www.facebook.com/DigitalSixable
www.soundcloud.com/DigitalSixable

quote:

Originally posted by Jake Benson Here's your argument used for another subject to manifest it's fallacious nature: "The main purpose of sight is to see in order to survive by keeping oneself out of danger. Animals have been on this planet long enough to develop the capacity to see clearly and spread this ability to detect the external world accurately through their genes. Since humanity and our lives and brains are more developed and susceptible to more learning, near-sightedness has a better opportunity to be learned."

Is that advantageous though? Evolution states that the traits that are best suited for the environment are amplified. You have a point and i understand that. Humans purpose in life these days isnt simply to reproduce, thus behaviour and adaptation isn't critical for reproduction. So in this case natural selection doesn't work for humans in the case of reproduction. And how could genes for homosexuality be amplified if a homosexual cannot reproduce? So in this case the only acceptable mutation would be a hox gene mutation which could easily be spotted. It hasn't so a genetic factor cannot be correlated.

The purpose of sex is to reproduce plain and simple. Anything taken out of that context is learned behaviour. To have sex with 3 women at a time may be just as appealing to one as having sex with 2 people of the same gendre to another. That comes down to learned behaviour and preference. Im sure if you wanted to have sex with a woman, you could get it up and do it. It would be the same with me and a man, im sure id be able to give it to a guy anally, but i chose not to. You may be more inclined towards this beahviour though. This explains bisexual behaviour. Most gays are typically bisexual and have had encouters with both sexes.

Its a tough subject to deal with but judging by animal history, the genes do not have a cahnce to get amiplified since a man cannot reproduce witha man and a woman cannot reproduce with a woman. The only way this can occur is through people who are bisexual. So bisexuals continue to reproduce and you may have mutation that would code for pure homosexuality that could only last for one generation. In this case a genetic analysis that compares with the parents could demonstrate a difference.

quote:

I could buy this, but then how does one learn to be "straight" early on in critical age? And what about those people who don't realize they're gay until they're well into their 20s?

it can also be factors in the whomb, i didnt count that out. Im just simply saying that a genetic factor is highly implausible.

quote:

Originally posted by Jake Benson No because I don't live in 18th century America and live in the city. How many boys do you know grow up in the city with the urge at 18 months to retreat to the forest to hunt creatures?

some tribes in africa still do this.

quote:

Originally posted by Jake Benson No one should let their kids watch Will and Grace. That's an annoying show. Let's negotiate. Let them do it at 12. Fyi encourage them to play sports. My mom never encouraged me and I felt like such a pansy. Everyone should play sports. =)

I love sports!

Thankfully I didn't grow up to be a lesbian.

I like watching them.. I hate playing them. lol. i guess that's why i'm straight!

___________________
Although you are far away
I know you'll always be
Near to me
Near to me

R.I.P. DarkAngel 12-16-o9

quote:

Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit Is that advantageous though? Evolution states that the traits that are best suited for the environment are amplified. You have a point and i understand that. Humans purpose in life these days isnt simply to reproduce, thus behaviour and adaptation isn't critical for reproduction. So in this case natural selection doesn't work for humans in the case of reproduction. And how could genes for homosexuality be amplified if a homosexual cannot reproduce? So in this case the only acceptable mutation would be a hox gene mutation which could easily be spotted. It hasn't so a genetic factor cannot be correlated.

It can still be a gene or genetic expression that is turned on or off more easily than other genes or genetic expressions. But yeah good point...if someone is gay then why aren't their offspring more likely to be gay? If one twin is gay the other is most likely to be gay too. What does that tell you?

Homosexuality on an evolutionary perspective is not advantageous at all. Neither is near-sightedness. However both cases do not matter in further progressing the human species now because we have developed a culture to adapt for this loss (i.e. contacts, laser surgery, ...and adoptiong, artificial insemination...too much population anyway).

quote:

The purpose of sex is to reproduce plain and simple. Anything taken out of that context is learned behaviour. To have sex with 3 women at a time may be just as appealing to one as having sex with 2 people of the same gendre to another. That comes down to learned behaviour and preference. Im sure if you wanted to have sex with a woman, you could get it up and do it. It would be the same with me and a man, im sure id be able to give it to a guy anally, but i chose not to. You may be more inclined towards this beahviour though. This explains bisexual behaviour. Most gays are typically bisexual and have had encouters with both sexes.

If you look at the inside of the shape of the anus, it matches that of an erect penis perfectly. Maybe humans males in the past have evolved to "practice" on each other before tapping the female. Therefore we should all just be bisexual. I got hit on by a hot blonde chick from Vancouver last night. =)

quote:

Its a tough subject to deal with but judging by animal history, the genes do not have a cahnce to get amiplified since a man cannot reproduce witha man and a woman cannot reproduce with a woman. The only way this can occur is through people who are bisexual. So bisexuals continue to reproduce and you may have mutation that would code for pure homosexuality that could only last for one generation. In this case a genetic analysis that compares with the parents could demonstrate a difference.

Don't forget gays can still produce, but their offspring are not more likely to be gay than straight people's offspring. So this rules out a "pure genetic" factor and shows there is nurture involved at some point.

quote:

it can also be factors in the whomb, i didnt count that out. Im just simply saying that a genetic factor is highly implausible.

I disagree with you in that genetic factor is plausible, but it is implausible without nurture, whether it be pre-natal, hormonal influences, chemicals that change gene expression, or something else.

Asking this question again: are there such things are boy/girl identical twins?

___________________
www.facebook.com/DigitalSixable
www.soundcloud.com/DigitalSixable