PDA

View Full Version : What's the cause of homosexuality?


Sammo
Dec 27th, 2011, 01:46 PM
I want to hear your opinion.

ToopsTame
Dec 27th, 2011, 01:47 PM
I want to hear your opinion.

Look it up on Google. Don't worry, it gets better.

Mattographer
Dec 27th, 2011, 01:50 PM
What's the cause of heterosexuality?

Sammo
Dec 27th, 2011, 01:54 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation


:spit: :sobbing:

I'm sorry but this is a total joke, I mean homosexuality as something genetic? Not a single psychological factor? What the...?? :facepalm:

Mashabator
Dec 27th, 2011, 01:54 PM
Hasnt been figured out yet, though they did do study on the brain that gay men and hetero women had the same side of the brain bigger than the other and hetero men and gay women had the same side of the brain bigger also.

I duno what my opinion is, who knows why it happens. it just does.

Sammo
Dec 27th, 2011, 01:57 PM
Hasnt been figured out yet, though they did do study on the brain that gay men and hetero women had the same side of the brain bigger than the other and hetero men and gay women had the same side of the brain bigger also.

I duno what my opinion is, who knows why it happens. it just does.

Brain is actually plastic, behaviours change the form of the brain. For example it's already proven that zen meditation increases a side of the brain related with memory

Mashabator
Dec 27th, 2011, 01:57 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation


:spit: :sobbing:

I'm sorry but this is a total joke, I mean homosexuality as something genetic? Not a single psychological factor? What the...?? :facepalm:

:facepalm: of course its genetic, no one chooses to be gay.

Sammo
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:00 PM
But it can be psychological too :shrug:

Mashabator
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:00 PM
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1815538,00.html
i just read it there, that explains it.

Sammo
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:01 PM
But as I said brain is plastic.

ToopsTame
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:04 PM
Someone bump this thread when Sammo inevitably comes out :oh:

Sammo
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:07 PM
Someone bump this thread when Sammo inevitably comes out :oh:

:confused::lol:

Anyway why do gay people have bad reactions when you tell them that homosexuality is most likely to be a psychological factor than genetic? I mean, perfectionism is also psychological :shrug:

Julian.
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:09 PM
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1815538,00.html
i just read it there, that explains it.

Thanks for posting that :lol: I so need to show this to my family when I finally come out to them :rolls:

Mashabator
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:13 PM
:confused::lol:

Anyway why do gay people have bad reactions when you tell them that homosexuality is most likely to be a psychological factor than genetic? I mean, perfectionism is also psychological :shrug:
It is in no way more psychological than genetic, i was born gay and it was genetic.
Thanks for posting that :lol: I so need to show this to my family when I finally come out to them :rolls:
Good idea actually! :lol:

ToopsTame
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:13 PM
:confused::lol:

Anyway why do gay people have bad reactions when you tell them that homosexuality is most likely to be a psychological factor than genetic? I mean, perfectionism is also psychological :shrug:

Because unless you are gay or a psychologist with expertise in that area, you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

I promise not to be judgmental when you're found lurking in the male models thread. We all go through a self-loathing phase. :oh:

ElusiveChanteuse
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:14 PM
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CQWlc4yvpnE/TeqjElWTtlI/AAAAAAAB_5w/MNNvYkaVsxY/s1600/steve_boyd_t1.jpg

dybbuk
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:16 PM
Someone page monzanator! We can't let him miss his favorite past-time. Though it may just be built into his system, he can just sense gay threads like a dog senses earthquakes.

And the idea that it's psychological OR genetic suggests small mindedness to me. It's likely a combination of both, and there being a psychological aspect doesn't mean there's any matter of choice in it. Only the stupid would come to a conclusion like that.

Stamp Paid
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:22 PM
Someone bump this thread when Sammo inevitably comes out :oh::oh:

Its different for every gay individual. Combination of nature and nurture, biological factors plus prenatal/early childhood environmental influences.

Sammo
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:22 PM
Because unless you are gay or a psychologist with expertise in that area, you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

I promise not to be judgmental when you're found lurking in the male models thread. We all go through a self-loathing phase. :oh:

And you're a DNA-sequencing scientist, right?

And :lol: about the second thing, it's good to know... but keep dreaming.

Stamp Paid
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:26 PM
It is in no way more psychological than genetic, i was born gay and it was genetic.

Good idea actually! :lol:
How do you know for sure that it was genetic? Is homosexuality a hereditary trait?

How do you know it could not have been your pre-natal environment, or something else biological other than just 'genetics'?

ToopsTame
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:27 PM
And you're a DNA-sequencing scientist, right?

Take a logic class when you get to university.

And :lol: about the second thing, it's good to know... but keep dreaming.

Oh honey, you talk about gay people more than most closeted republican congressmen do ;)

Stamp Paid
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:28 PM
And the idea that it's psychological OR genetic suggests small mindedness to me. It's likely a combination of both, and there being a psychological aspect doesn't mean there's any matter of choice in it. Only the stupid misinformed would come to a conclusion like that.I agree with you on this.

Sammo
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:31 PM
Take a logic class when you get to university.



Oh honey, you talk about gay people more than most closeted republican congressmen do ;)


It's called scientific curiosity ;) I like psychology, I even tried to 'treat' Sesil Karatantcheva before she sent me to hell :oh:

miffedmax
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:31 PM
What's the cause of heterosexuality?

Lena's bangs. Duh.

Seriously, growing up with a gay brother, I can tell you we were different from birth, and not just the ways that two straight brothers are different. I admit that when he came out it was a surprise, but looking back on it, I could clearly see that his way of relating to the world was very different from mine, even though we both shared a lot of the same values and interests. And my dad, who was far more worldly wise than the rest of us, greeted my brother's revelation with "I know you are."

I think environment may help shape how some aspects of being gay manifest themselves-but that's true for straights, too.

As far as I know, there have been no successful efforts to develop a psychological profile of what a "gay" parenting style is--it's blamed on domineering mothers, absent fathers, no wait, it's domineering fathers and absent mothers, or maybe it could be just a choice--and there is an ever-growing body of evidence that links brain characteristics, genetics and hormone levels to being gay.

Williamsser
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:44 PM
What's the cause of heterosexuality?

The penis and the vagina are genetically fit for each other. On the other hand, the anus is to eliminate feces, not to receive a penis.

Stamp Paid
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:44 PM
Lena's bangs. Duh.

Seriously, growing up with a gay brother, I can tell you we were different from birth, and not just the ways that two straight brothers are different. I admit that when he came out it was a surprise, but looking back on it, I could clearly see that his way of relating to the world was very different from mine, even though we both shared a lot of the same values and interests. And my dad, who was far more worldly wise than the rest of us, greeted my brother's revelation with "I know you are."

I think environment may help shape how some aspects of being gay manifest themselves-but that's true for straights, too.

As far as I know, there have been no successful efforts to develop a psychological profile of what a "gay" parenting style is--it's blamed on domineering mothers, absent fathers, no wait, it's domineering fathers and absent mothers, or maybe it could be just a choice--and there is an ever-growing body of evidence that links brain characteristics, genetics and hormone levels to being gay.I think a lot of this has to deal with how we socially construct sexual identity. For most of modern human history, homosexuality was something that people did, but it wasn't who they 'were'. it wasn't until the late 19th century that homosexuality began to be pathologized and people began to be identified as 'homosexuals'. (Read Foucault's A History of Sexuality for more details on this) Those rigid categories don't accurately reflect how fluid sexuality is. I personally know people (male and female) who have gone years of their lives as heterosexual people, then spent years as a gay person, then back to being straight. I suppose they could be called bisexuals, but I think going back to the Kinsey scales of sexuality, no one is 100% straight or 100% gay.

Then I think about the ritual homosexuality in some Papua New Guinea tribes, and how people outside of the West conceptualize same gender love. I think in the U.S./Europe can't get a clear answer for what causes homosexuality because we are attempting to explain sexual identity from a 19th century institutional paradigm.

Stamp Paid
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:47 PM
The penis and the vagina are genetically fit for each other. On the other hand, the anus is to eliminate feces, not to receive a penis.Genetically? :lol:

duhcity
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:50 PM
The penis and the vagina are genetically fit for each other. On the other hand, the anus is to eliminate feces, not to receive a penis.

So if I choose not to have anal sex, that's okay?
What happens when a straight couple has anal sex?

Sammo
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:50 PM
I think a lot of this has to deal with how we socially construct sexual identity. For most of modern human history, homosexuality was something that people did, but it wasn't who they 'were'. it wasn't until the late 19th century that homosexuality began to be pathologized and people began to be identified as 'homosexuals'. (Read Foucault's A History of Sexuality for more details on this) Those rigid categories don't accurately reflect how fluid sexuality is. I personally know people (male and female) who have gone years of their lives as heterosexual people, then spent years as a gay person, then back to being straight. I suppose they could be called bisexuals, but I think going back to the Kinsey scales of sexuality, no one is 100% straight or 100% gay.

Then I think about the ritual homosexuality in some Papua New Guinea tribes, and how people outside of the West conceptualize same gender love. I think in the U.S./Europe can't get a clear answer for what causes homosexuality because we are attempting to explain sexual identity from a 19th century institutional paradigm.

Nice answer!

wayitis
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:52 PM
Lena's bangs. Duh.

Seriously, growing up with a gay brother, I can tell you we were different from birth, and not just the ways that two straight brothers are different. I admit that when he came out it was a surprise, but looking back on it, I could clearly see that his way of relating to the world was very different from mine, even though we both shared a lot of the same values and interests. And my dad, who was far more worldly wise than the rest of us, greeted my brother's revelation with "I know you are."

I think environment may help shape how some aspects of being gay manifest themselves-but that's true for straights, too.

As far as I know, there have been no successful efforts to develop a psychological profile of what a "gay" parenting style is--it's blamed on domineering mothers, absent fathers, no wait, it's domineering fathers and absent mothers, or maybe it could be just a choice--and there is an ever-growing body of evidence that links brain characteristics, genetics and hormone levels to being gay.

great post, as usual! as for those who said about coming out to their parents, believe me, if they brought you up since birth they already know about it, or at least suspect about your preferences... They might not want to talk about it, or do not want to believe in what they think, but the same genetic predisposition that gave you your sexual preferences made you behave in more particular ways while growing up, and your parents should surely have picked up on that...

Stamp Paid
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:53 PM
So if I choose not to have anal sex, that's okay?
What happens when a straight couple has anal sex?And all gay people don't even have anal sex anyway. :lol:

Williamsser
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:55 PM
Genetically? :lol:

I meant the male reproductive system and the female reproductive system are genetically designed for each other. For example, semen carries protective enzymes designed to survive the harsh environment of a female uterus. Also, the cervix of a female is designed to store sperm ejected into the uterus.

shap_half
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:55 PM
I can't stand it when people use the word "preference."

HippityHop
Dec 27th, 2011, 02:56 PM
The penis and the vagina are genetically fit for each other. On the other hand, the anus is to eliminate feces, not to receive a penis.

Methinks that you're on a very slippery slope here (no pun intended) though it's clear that the two are meant for reproduction.

The Dawntreader
Dec 27th, 2011, 03:03 PM
Life.

Stamp Paid
Dec 27th, 2011, 03:05 PM
I meant the male reproductive system and the female reproductive system are genetically designed for each other. For example, semen carries protective enzymes designed to survive the harsh environment of a female uterus. Also, the cervix of a female is designed to store sperm ejected into the uterus.So you are against oral sex as well? The mouth was not designed to receive a penis, and the protective enzymes of pre-seminal fluid/semen can be very harsh to the esophagus.

wayitis
Dec 27th, 2011, 03:13 PM
I can't stand it when people use the word "preference."

after thinking about it, I realized it was a bad choice of word, I apologize..

wayitis
Dec 27th, 2011, 03:15 PM
Do you think that pedophiles, necrophiles, zoophiles and other deviants are all born that way?

of course not, they obviously chose to be that way so they could all be called "deviants", right?

The Dawntreader
Dec 27th, 2011, 03:17 PM
I can't stand it when people use the word "preference."

It's such an awful word. Alongside 'lifestyle'. The go-to word for right-wing heteros.

Stamp Paid
Dec 27th, 2011, 03:18 PM
It's such an awful word. Alongside 'lifestyle'. The go-to word for right-wing heteros.I wish it was only right wingers :oh:
A lot of people are just uninformed in general.

Moveyourfeet
Dec 27th, 2011, 03:23 PM
Brain is actually plastic, behaviours change the form of the brain. For example it's already proven that zen meditation increases a side of the brain related with memory

But as I said brain is plastic.

:facepalm:
Don't you think that neurobiologists know that? Do you know what peer-reviewed research is?

Anyway, the parts of the brain studied were not involved in the regulation of sexual behaviour which made it unlikely that the size differences resulted from differences in sexual behaviour.

That being said, studies of Monozygotic twins didn't show 100% concordance. They did show a higher concordance than dizygotic twins (with error taken into account) which suggests that while not 100% genetic, homosexuality does have a biological component.
Just how large the genetic component is, is yet to be determined.

The Dawntreader
Dec 27th, 2011, 03:26 PM
I wish it was only right wingers :oh:
A lot of people are just uninformed in general.

Some people are just morons. It's not even a matter of them finding some kind of enlightenment, some people are just irretrievably stupid:lol:

Mynarco
Dec 27th, 2011, 03:34 PM
It's such an awful word. Alongside 'lifestyle'. The go-to word for right-wing heteros.

sorry but what's wrong with 'lifestyle'?

Soliloque
Dec 27th, 2011, 03:35 PM
Gay-lifestyle is wrong. Not lifestyle.

Dominic
Dec 27th, 2011, 03:36 PM
The penis and the vagina are genetically fit for each other. On the other hand, the anus is to eliminate feces, not to receive a penis.

OMG is this why some ppl are straight!? I just thought it was because they were attracted to the opposite sex! Wow good decision on their part, as their sex organs fit perfectly into each other :rolleyes:

The Dawntreader
Dec 27th, 2011, 03:39 PM
sorry but what's wrong with 'lifestyle'?

Usually it's perceived as some kind of whim that gay men have undertook, rather than something they have no control over.

Being gay is not a lifestyle choice. It's just a natural state of circumstance.

Certinfy
Dec 27th, 2011, 03:56 PM
The penis and the vagina are genetically fit for each other. On the other hand, the anus is to eliminate feces, not to receive a penis.
That's an interesting way of looking at it. But then at least 2 guys have places to put their penis', whereas with 2 women... :confused:

Apoleb
Dec 27th, 2011, 03:56 PM
I lean to the non-genetic camp more so than the genetic. Personal experience tells me that the close mother-son distant father relationship is way more prevalent among gay men to be merely incidental. I think someone did a poll on this here back in the day, and the results also suggested that. So I do think there's more truth to the early 20th century psycho theories than people like to think, but they certainly are not the whole story.

Ultimately, I think there are two blueprints in every brain, in which gender self-identity and attraction are mutually linked, and the blueprints are built very early on in development, probably by early childhood (doesn't have to be on show though). In gay men, the blueprint more widespread in women overrides the one more prevalent among men, which also explains the close bond gay men build with women even in very early childhood in terms of self-identity. Probably genes are important, but would really doubt that they could explain the whole story, or even most of it.

Maybe the "gayer" the person is, the more genetic it is likely to be. :oh:

Soliloque
Dec 27th, 2011, 04:02 PM
It's probably a combination of multiple things. A mix of biologicals, psychologicals factors also influenced by social environment.

And the close mother/distant father thing is old and outdated. Sure some homosexuals have such relationships with their parents but it's far from being a common thing for every homosexual. And the bond with women is not true all the time either.

Novichok
Dec 27th, 2011, 04:15 PM
:oh:

Its different for every gay individual. Combination of nature and nurture, biological factors plus prenatal/early childhood environmental influences.

This.

Novichok
Dec 27th, 2011, 04:19 PM
Do you think that pedophiles, necrophiles, zoophiles and other deviants are all born that way?

Maybe. Maybe not. Why is that relevant?

The penis and the vagina are genetically fit for each other. On the other hand, the anus is to eliminate feces, not to receive a penis.

Nope, the anus can have more than one purpose.

Moveyourfeet
Dec 27th, 2011, 04:25 PM
I lean to the non-genetic camp more so than the genetic. Personal experience tells me that the close mother-son distant father relationship is way more prevalent among gay men to be merely incidental.

This may be but one must be careful not to confer causality to perceived correlation, especially in limited sample sizes.
For instance, fathers can become distant when realizing their son doesn't like culturally male things and mothers in turn, overprotective.

Ultimately, I think there are two blueprints in every brain, in which gender self-identity and attraction are mutually linked, and the blueprints are built very early on in development, probably by early childhood (doesn't have to be on show though). In gay men, the blueprint more widespread in women overrides the one more prevalent among men, which also explains the close bond gay men build with women even in very early childhood in terms of self-identity. Probably genes are important, but would really doubt that they could explain the whole story, or even most of it.

I'd leave the hypotheses to neurobiologists. However, in your idea, what are 'blueprints' if not genes?

ToopsTame
Dec 27th, 2011, 04:30 PM
I lean to the non-genetic camp more so than the genetic. Personal experience tells me that the close mother-son distant father relationship is way more prevalent among gay men to be merely incidental. I think someone did a poll on this here back in the day, and the results also suggested that. So I do think there's more truth to the early 20th century psycho theories than people like to think, but they certainly are not the whole story.


I can't disprove what you say, but the plural of anecdote is not data. I haven't seen any scientific evidence behind those old school theories either, they just sound like old wives tales. They might be right, or they could just be the imaginations of the theorists running wild without reason.


Ultimately, I think there are two blueprints in every brain, in which gender self-identity and attraction are mutually linked, and the blueprints are built very early on in development, probably by early childhood (doesn't have to be on show though). In gay men, the blueprint more widespread in women overrides the one more prevalent among men, which also explains the close bond gay men build with women even in very early childhood in terms of self-identity. Probably genes are important, but would really doubt that they could explain the whole story, or even most of it.

Maybe the "gayer" the person is, the more genetic it is likely to be. :oh:

This binary blueprint idea is attractive but it doesn't explain how many people say they're bisexual, or how some people can be butch and gay or effeminate and straight, or how some people say their sexual desire changed over time to be more same-sex or opposite-sex or how many men who have sex with men claim in studies that they want men for sex but can only fall in love with and be romantic with women. Sexual orientation is a really complicated thing as you mentioned, we don't even have a solid definition for what constitutes straight or gay or bisexual. Add to that that most gay people love analyzing themselves and their community and getting all Freudian at the drop of a hat. It's probably a really complicated behaviour that's always been around and is impossible to pin down to a handful of factors.

Dominic
Dec 27th, 2011, 04:48 PM
I lean to the non-genetic camp more so than the genetic. Personal experience tells me that the close mother-son distant father relationship is way more prevalent among gay men to be merely incidental. I think someone did a poll on this here back in the day, and the results also suggested that. So I do think there's more truth to the early 20th century psycho theories than people like to think, but they certainly are not the whole story.


Can anyone point out the flaw in this (as an argument to support the non-genetic therory) I see one really obvious one but I really gtg :lol: I'll be back later to expose it if no one did..

Apoleb
Dec 27th, 2011, 05:04 PM
This may be but one must be careful not to confer causality to perceived correlation, especially in limited sample sizes.
For instance, fathers can become distant when realizing their son doesn't like culturally male things and mothers in turn, overprotective.

Yeah, I run into this argument, but it isn't very strong imo, cause children 3-5 years of age have much less authority in setting the nature of the relationship. And I agree, I'm certainly not saying what I wrote here is right because it isn't supported by solid data, but just my own intuition/reasoning based on my observations/experience that there's probably more truth to it than being totally dismissed.

I'd leave the hypotheses to neurobiologists. However, in your idea, what are 'blueprints' if not genes?

Blueprint as in a neural circuit that is set up in early development and that ultimately dictates sexual behavior. Genes are definitely very important but they don't have to be the only factors. I guess I see sexual behavior as tension between those two blueprints, which may coexist or override each other.


I can't disprove what you say, but the plural of anecdote is not data. I haven't seen any scientific evidence behind those old school theories either, they just sound like old wives tales. They might be right, or they could just be the imaginations of the theorists running wild without reason.

Yes, at the moment we're all speculating. But not all speculations are equally worthless. All science starts with good observation and analysis of one's own personal experience. But yeah, it ain't "right" unless the data support it, but I'm merely favoring a model over another based on my own observations. I also think those theories hold more credit than being old waves tales.

BTW, here is something that resembles more data or scientific authority on the subject: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/gay-and-lesbian-well-being/201108/gay-men-and-their-mothers-is-there-special-closeness

another edit: surprisigly enough, this does not seem a much researched subject. Most of the studies I'm finding are from the 70s and 80s, and they kind of support what I'm saying. Here's one from 1996: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8969111

edit #3: here is one attempting to test causality, which is pretty cool, but it's for Gender Atypical Behavior: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21199500

So I would say science isn't exactly mute on this topic.

This binary blueprint idea is attractive but it doesn't explain how many people say they're bisexual, or how some people can be butch and gay or effeminate and straight, or how some people say their sexual desire changed over time to be more same-sex or opposite-sex or how many men who have sex with men claim in studies that they want men for sex but can only fall in love with and be romantic with women. Sexual orientation is a really complicated thing as you mentioned, we don't even have a solid definition for what constitutes straight or gay or bisexual. Add to that that most gay people love analyzing themselves and their community and getting all Freudian at the drop of a hat. It's probably a really complicated behaviour that's always been around and is impossible to pin down to a handful of factors.

I think you can explain the nuances in terms of tension between those two "blueprints". And while it's true that the details are probably very complex, I don't dismiss the idea that the core of the understanding could actually be quite simple. Not that I'm comparing the crap I wrote here in any shape to evolution (:lol:), but despite the fact that the most complex computer systems can't capture the breadth of life, one ridiculously simple idea by a man explained most of it.

Mistress of Evil
Dec 27th, 2011, 05:15 PM
http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lw6hjgN7Rj1qfa9sjo1_400.jpg

Can't be bothered to go thru the thread, it must be a mess!

Javi.
Dec 27th, 2011, 05:25 PM
What's the cause of heterosexuality?

This.
Pointless thread

ampers&
Dec 27th, 2011, 05:25 PM
Can't be bothered to go thru the thread, it must be a mess!
It's not at all. It's actually pretty intellectually stimulating.

Anyway, I can't wait for the day when this is no longer a question that has to be discussed and analyzed by intellectuals and professionals alike. When people can just be who they are and love who they want without having to answer questions about who they intrinsically are. I know this is naive and unrealistic, but you can't help but hope.

Aside: I also can't help but notice how often lesbians are left out of the bulk of these kinds of discussions. :lol: They always tend to focus on the gay male psyche/perspective which automatically makes a lot of the arguments flawed.

VeeJJ
Dec 27th, 2011, 05:54 PM
It is in no way a choice or decision. That is stupid. Who would choose to be gay over being straight? Being straight would be so much easier. I say this a an openly gay man. Gay is what I am, not by choice, just by a matter of "it is what it is." I love being gay and I love men and penis and the whole nine yards, that should not suggest that if I had a choice I would be gay. I do think it is more based on genetics. My entire family knows and after I came out they were like "um yeah we figured that out when you were like 5." I had a healthy household with both, mother, father, brother, and sister. And there are other people in my family that are gay. I don't know if there is a gene or anything but it has to do with something scientific forsure.

lefty24
Dec 27th, 2011, 06:00 PM
What do you guys think about the fact that if you're left handed you're more likely to be gay and especially a lesbian?
Do you believe it's true?

Moveyourfeet
Dec 27th, 2011, 06:04 PM
Aside: I also can't help but notice how often lesbians are left out of the bulk of these kinds of discussions. :lol: They always tend to focus on the gay male psyche/perspective which automatically makes a lot of the arguments flawed.

If one is going on the premise that male and female homosexuality have the same causality then yes, your conclusion of flawed arguments holds.

Personally, I don't believe this to be the case and there is some science to corroborate this, but it isn't definitive.

Nicolás89
Dec 27th, 2011, 06:08 PM
I meant the male reproductive system and the female reproductive system are genetically designed for each other. For example, semen carries protective enzymes designed to survive the harsh environment of a female uterus. Also, the cervix of a female is designed to store sperm ejected into the uterus.

And I guess some people's sperm tastes good because it's full of nutrients.

I thought we the homo sapiens had evolved into this complex being and that we are beyond animals in what sex and relationships are and mean to us. Oh well, I guess dolphins are back as the most evolved species.

Stamp Paid
Dec 27th, 2011, 06:13 PM
It's not at all. It's actually pretty intellectually stimulating.

Anyway, I can't wait for the day when this is no longer a question that has to be discussed and analyzed by intellectuals and professionals alike. When people can just be who they are and love who they want without having to answer questions about who they intrinsically are. I know this is naive and unrealistic, but you can't help but hope.

Aside: I also can't help but notice how often lesbians are left out of the bulk of these kinds of discussions. :lol: They always tend to focus on the gay male psyche/perspective which automatically makes a lot of the arguments flawed.Damn I hate when I can't rep you :lol::lol:

ampers&
Dec 27th, 2011, 06:17 PM
If one is going on the premise that male and female homosexuality have the same causality then yes, your conclusion of flawed arguments holds.

Personally, I don't believe this to be the case and there is some science to corroborate this, but it isn't definitive.
Tell me more...
Damn I hate when I can't rep you :lol::lol::hug:

miffedmax
Dec 27th, 2011, 06:20 PM
I think a lot of this has to deal with how we socially construct sexual identity. For most of modern human history, homosexuality was something that people did, but it wasn't who they 'were'. it wasn't until the late 19th century that homosexuality began to be pathologized and people began to be identified as 'homosexuals'. (Read Foucault's A History of Sexuality for more details on this) Those rigid categories don't accurately reflect how fluid sexuality is. I personally know people (male and female) who have gone years of their lives as heterosexual people, then spent years as a gay person, then back to being straight. I suppose they could be called bisexuals, but I think going back to the Kinsey scales of sexuality, no one is 100% straight or 100% gay.

Then I think about the ritual homosexuality in some Papua New Guinea tribes, and how people outside of the West conceptualize same gender love. I think in the U.S./Europe can't get a clear answer for what causes homosexuality because we are attempting to explain sexual identity from a 19th century institutional paradigm.

I can't speak to Papua New Guinea, but Foucault is far from a universally acknowledged source on anything. (And yes, I've read him).

As far as I'm concerned, "homosexuality" is gender neutral. I think nature is more important than nurture for both gays and lesbians.

Lena's bangs.

debby
Dec 27th, 2011, 06:23 PM
How can it be based on genetics ?? our tastes in sexuality are based on genetics ???

I mean, we can all have a crush on different looking people : blonde, brunette or ginger, thin, average or big.... IDK I am not a fan of this theory tbh.

I don't know, actually I thought being straight, homo or bisexual was just "like that" :shrug: It happens like that, it's life, you can't do anything about that. It's a mix of different factors that makes it natural to happen :shrug:

Stamp Paid
Dec 27th, 2011, 06:26 PM
I can't speak to Papua New Guinea, but Foucault is far from a universally acknowledged source on anything. (And yes, I've read him).

Lena's bangs.Of course, no meta-narrative such as "The History of Sexuality" is gonna be perfect :lol:
But some crucial insights can be teased from his analysis and the primary sources that he draws upon in his synthesis.

Apoleb
Dec 27th, 2011, 06:29 PM
I can't speak to Papua New Guinea, but Foucault is far from a universally acknowledged source on anything. (And yes, I've read him).

Lena's bangs.

I'm not sure if I read him or someone else from the same postmodern French school (edit: it was Bourdieu), but I remember that the effects of social conditioning on gender and sexuality were being wildly overemphasized. This makes no sense to me. The effects are probably minimal if any. Sexual behavior is a much "biologically" hardwired concept all over the animal world, and it needs to be.

Stamp Paid
Dec 27th, 2011, 06:38 PM
I'm not sure if I read him or someone else from the same postmodern French school (edit: it was Bourdieu), but I remember that the effects of social conditioning on gender and sexuality were being wildly overemphasized. This makes no sense to me. The effects are probably minimal if any. Sexual behavior is a much "biologically" hardwired concept all over the animal world, and it needs to be.Okay, I'm glad I see your edit now, because I was gonna say that I didn't get that from my reading of Foucault.

And I'm not sure of the extent to which culture and biology converge in the construction of gender/sexual norms and deviance, but most ethnographic analyses from global/holistic perspectives show that the effects of cultural norms on sexual behavior and sexuality are far from minimal. Some (IMO severely misguided) scientists make that same argument about the biological hardwiring of "racial" characteristics. Races are social constructions that attempt to account for a myriad of both biological and cultural traits. I believe sexualities are similar in this respect.

WowWow
Dec 27th, 2011, 06:52 PM
Well, when parents fuck and the future mom is on top, the kid turns out to be gay/lesbian. That's the only logical explanation.

So, there.

moby
Dec 27th, 2011, 07:02 PM
The cause of male homosexuality is hot men. I don't know why lesbians exist, but I accept their misguided taste.

pierce85
Dec 27th, 2011, 07:05 PM
Homosexuality in my opinion is caused by certain brain abnormalities, hormones, biological, social and environmental factors and so on :shrug:

Nobody knows the true answer(yet).

Abnormalities? Let's refrain from using words with negative essence please

And who chooses what is normal and what isn't in life? Is there a Grand Book of normal things and behaviours?

All I know is that the vast majority of people against homosexuality base their opinions on their religious beliefs.

Religion is the opium of the people. That phrase is the answer to all your questions

Moveyourfeet
Dec 27th, 2011, 07:18 PM
Tell me more...

I can PM you a more thought out version later as I have to leave in a bit, but the basic tldr version is: If homosexuality has a genetic component, then there must be an evolutionary model to support it. The evolutionary model that most supports a constant, low population percentage of male homosexuality is antagonistic to female homosexuality, thus they most likely have different origins.

There's more corroborating evidence, such as the higher probability of having a gay son, the more sons a woman has previously had; as well as the higher incidence of male homosexuality in males of the maternal line that aren't observed for female homosexuality.

Apoleb
Dec 27th, 2011, 07:18 PM
Okay, I'm glad I see your edit now, because I was gonna say that I didn't get that from my reading of Foucault.

And I'm not sure of the extent to which culture and biology converge in the construction of gender/sexual norms and deviance, but most ethnographic analyses from global/holistic perspectives show that the effects of cultural norms on sexual behavior and sexuality are far from minimal. Some (IMO severely misguided) scientists make that same argument about the biological hardwiring of "racial" characteristics. Races are social constructions that attempt to account for a myriad of both biological and cultural traits. I believe sexualities are similar in this respect.

But I don't agree with drawing the equivalence to start with. Race is not a biological necessity as is sexual behavior for all organisms that can't just reproduce by division.

The cause of male homosexuality is hot men. I don't know why lesbians exist, but I accept their misguided taste.

I remember when I was 13/14 and I found out I liked men, my reaction was that surely everyone must like men. Straight men are probably lying and acting, and deep in their hearts they really can't resist them. :tape::lol:

Stamp Paid
Dec 27th, 2011, 07:31 PM
But I don't agree with drawing the equivalence to start with. Race is not a biological necessity as is sexual behavior for all organisms that can't just reproduce by division.You are collapsing sexual behavior, sexual orientation, and sexual identity. Being homosexual is about more than just who you have sex with; there is also a range of affective behaviors and emotions that people who identify as gay have with members of the same sex, in addition to the pure sexual attraction. True, sex is necessary for reproduction, but its not as if gay people are incapable of having heterosexual sex and reproducing. Throughout most of human history they have done just that. :lol:

ToopsTame
Dec 27th, 2011, 07:34 PM
The cause of male homosexuality is hot men. I don't know why lesbians exist, but I accept their misguided taste.

Shut down the thread now. There won't be a more accurate answer than this.

I can PM you a more thought out version later as I have to leave in a bit, but the basic tldr version is: If homosexuality has a genetic component, then there must be an evolutionary model to support it. The evolutionary model that most supports a constant, low population percentage of male homosexuality is antagonistic to female homosexuality, thus they most likely have different origins.

There's more corroborating evidence, such as the higher probability of having a gay son, the more sons a woman has previously had; as well as the higher incidence of male homosexuality in males of the maternal line that aren't observed for female homosexuality.

This is basically pop-biology. Nowadays we too often try to find evolutionary justification for the smallest personality trait or behaviour even though the logic of evolution is much more complicated than x helps organism reproduce or y helps populations stay healthy and therefore is a useful trait . Male and female homosexuality might well be the same thing exactly (genetically), our not being able to see how it works into evolutionary fitness is meaningless as we barely understand how macroevolution works.

Apoleb
Dec 27th, 2011, 07:41 PM
Shut down the thread now. There won't be a more accurate answer than this.



This is basically pop-biology. Nowadays we too often try to find evolutionary justification for the smallest personality trait or behaviour even though the logic of evolution is much more complicated than x helps organism reproduce or y helps populations stay healthy and therefore is a useful trait . Male and female homosexuality might well be the same thing exactly (genetically), our not being able to see how it works into evolutionary fitness is meaningless as we barely understand how macroevolution works.

True, and I would also add that I'm missing on why we HAVE to find an evolutionary rationale. There are all kinds of inherited traits and "disorders" that do not seem to be useful at all in fitness, if not even derogatory. But they will keep on being transmitted for a relatively long period of time. Evolutionary rationales are mostly useful insofar leading to testable hypotheses about how things work.

And evolutionary psychology is another pet peeve of mine. There's a tendency to jump on every behavior and try to explain in terms of evolution - as if that's the only way it can make sense, while in reality, they don't even have to be genetic in the first place.

pierce85
Dec 27th, 2011, 07:49 PM
I laugh at all the people who condemn homosexuality by claiming that only through reproduction can the human species survive.


And who said that the survival of humans is good for the planet/universe and they should live forever? Maybe humans just like dinosaurs and every other species have a birth point and an ending point.

Javi.
Dec 27th, 2011, 07:53 PM
Homosexuality in my opinion is caused by certain brain abnormalities, hormones, biological, social and environmental factors and so on :shrug:

Nobody knows the true answer(yet).

:facepalm:
I logged here more than 4 years ago and this is the first time I'm giving bad reputation.
Congrats.

SwingVolley93
Dec 27th, 2011, 07:55 PM
I think these labels, gay, straight, bi etc. shouldn't be taken into with so much consideration. I feel love is a strong sense and you cannot help who you love, be it a man or a woman. That being said I could never picture myself falling in love with another man, but the same cannot be said for everyone. Love should never be given a label.

debby
Dec 27th, 2011, 07:58 PM
I laugh at all the people who condemn homosexuality by claiming that only through reproduction can the human species survive.

Homosexuality is not natural in the sense that you can't reproduce. You reproduce to keep our race going on.
We can all be thankful not everyone is homosexual on Earth :lol: but it's too simplistic to say that, because if that was the case, I am sure we would still reproduce between men and women just to have kids. Yes, sometimes I like to imagine the world if we were like that or that... It's intriguing :lol:

Love is not natural, if we see things this way. Only heterosexual sex is natural, because it allows humans not to extinct for the moment.

debby
Dec 27th, 2011, 07:59 PM
I think these labels, gay, straight, bi etc. shouldn't be taken into with so much consideration. I feel love is a strong sense and you cannot help who you love, be it a man or a woman. That being said I could never picture myself falling in love with another man, but the same cannot be said for everyone. Love should never be given a label.

I like to think that, that's why I describe myself as a "bi curious" :lol: Who can predict if I will never fall in love or have sex with a woman?

But I do think it's not totally true. We all have strong preferences, and we will never try the "other side".

WowWow
Dec 27th, 2011, 08:03 PM
Homosexuality is not natural in the sense that you can't reproduce. You reproduce to keep our race going on.
We can all be thankful not everyone is homosexual on Earth :lol: but it's too simplistic to say that, because if that was the case, I am sure we would still reproduce between men and women just to have kids. Yes, sometimes I like to imagine the world if we were like that or that... It's intriguing :lol:

Love is not natural, if we see things this way. Only heterosexual sex is natural, because it allows humans not to extinct for the moment.

Wrong! It's very natural in terms of overpopulating preventions.

miffedmax
Dec 27th, 2011, 08:05 PM
I can PM you a more thought out version later as I have to leave in a bit, but the basic tldr version is: If homosexuality has a genetic component, then there must be an evolutionary model to support it. The evolutionary model that most supports a constant, low population percentage of male homosexuality is antagonistic to female homosexuality, thus they most likely have different origins.

There's more corroborating evidence, such as the higher probability of having a gay son, the more sons a woman has previously had; as well as the higher incidence of male homosexuality in males of the maternal line that aren't observed for female homosexuality.

Worthwhile or not, there have been evolutionary models proposed to support both male and female homosexuality. Not that I really care about them.

Whatever societal constructs we have-and at least in the West, they go back way beyond the 19th Century-most of us have pretty strong preferences one way or the other and there is a growing body of evidence that there is a biological component to it that's pretty damn important. I'm not sure it's entirely genetic, but there are biological factors other than just genes at play.

ToopsTame
Dec 27th, 2011, 08:07 PM
True, and I would also add that I'm missing on why we HAVE to find an evolutionary rationale. There are all kinds of inherited traits and "disorders" that do not seem to be useful at all in fitness, if not even derogatory. But they will keep on being transmitted for a relatively long period of time. Evolutionary rationales are mostly useful insofar leading to testable hypotheses about how things work.

And evolutionary psychology is another pet peeve of mine. There's a tendency to jump on every behavior and try to explain in terms of evolution - as if that's the only way it can make sense, while in reality, they don't even have to be genetic in the first place.

Exactly. It's easy to see why many of us want homosexuality to be completely genetic though. It's easier to show other people (and in many cases, yourself) that you didn't choose this or that you can't change when it is as predetermined as hair colour or right handedness. It's much harder to explain how it's a multivariate thing that's probably biological but also influenced by social norms, developmental relationships and personality traits. People worry that it could weaken the argument that it's immutable and in the worst case even add some credibility to "conversion" therapies. They're wrong though. The one thing even the APA agrees on is that you can't force yourself into or out of it, no matter how hard Mr. Bachmann tries.

debby
Dec 27th, 2011, 08:10 PM
Wrong! It's very natural in terms of overpopulating preventions.

huh?

Pops Maellard
Dec 27th, 2011, 08:11 PM
It's probably a combination of nature and nurture :shrug:.

miffedmax
Dec 27th, 2011, 08:14 PM
Wrong! It's very natural in terms of overpopulating preventions.

It also (contrary to the claims of some) is not unique to humans.

Self-gratification would also be unnatural by definition of not contributing to the reproduction of the human race, too.

azdaja
Dec 27th, 2011, 08:23 PM
Do you think that pedophiles, necrophiles, zoophiles and other deviants are all born that way?
apparently yes.

many years ago i read something on the subject of sexuality which made a lot of sense and it settled the issue for me. it was basically going against the argument of some right-wing bullshit that homosexuals are significantly more likely to "become" paedophile than the heterosexual guys based on the fact that more boys were victims of the sexual abuse than girls. in what i read it was argued that our sexuality is largely, but not completely genetically determined and that we can be attracted to postpubescent or prepubescent males or females. changes in sexual behaviour can happen if there is a lack of preferable partners at least in some individuals. add to that the identity question and you can explain wild discrepancies in the estimates about the percentage of homosexuals in the society. their number is between 1-2%. everything above it is people who had a homosexual experience or period in their lives.

the basic answer is yes, though, it is 99.9% genetic.

WowWow
Dec 27th, 2011, 08:24 PM
It also (contrary to the claims of some) is not unique to humans.

Self-gratification would also be unnatural by definition of not contributing to the reproduction of the human race, too.

Lena's bangs!

Moveyourfeet
Dec 27th, 2011, 10:04 PM
True, and I would also add that I'm missing on why we HAVE to find an evolutionary rationale.

Curiosity as to why genes for a trait that greatly reduces gene transmission continues to remain in the gene pool?

Nowadays we too often try to find evolutionary justification for the smallest personality trait or behaviour even though the logic of evolution is much more complicated than x helps organism reproduce or y helps populations stay healthy and therefore is a useful trait . Male and female homosexuality might well be the same thing exactly (genetically), our not being able to see how it works into evolutionary fitness is meaningless as we barely understand how macroevolution works.

I'm reading gross generalizations and assumptions without substance.
The gist of your post was basically this:
Male and female homosexuality might well be the same thing exactly (genetically) or not.
Ok...

Worthwhile or not, there have been evolutionary models proposed to support both male and female homosexuality. Not that I really care about them.

Hey Miffed, can you point me to these research papers? I am very interested.
Thanks.

Exactly. It's easy to see why many of us want homosexuality to be completely genetic though.

It's pretty clear at this point that sexuality is not 100% genetically determined and that its genetic component comprises a number of genes.

Cajka
Dec 27th, 2011, 10:34 PM
Wrong! It's very natural in terms of overpopulating preventions.

Actually, this makes perfect sense.

It also (contrary to the claims of some) is not unique to humans.

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned this before in this discussion.


Self-gratification would also be unnatural by definition of not contributing to the reproduction of the human race, too.

Well, it's not that nobody has ever tried to prove this. Any sexual pleasure is a sin, you know. :p Sex only serves to make the babies. Honestly, those who say that homosexuality is unnatural also often say that abortion is a crime against the nature, God or whatever. Sometimes it's ignorance, maybe some dogma, but more often it's just hate. :shrug:

shap_half
Dec 27th, 2011, 11:37 PM
I remember when I was 13/14 and I found out I liked men, my reaction was that surely everyone must like men. Straight men are probably lying and acting, and deep in their hearts they really can't resist them. :tape::lol:

I wish that was my reaction. Mine was mostly, "Oooooooh noooooooooo!"

Dominic
Dec 27th, 2011, 11:57 PM
I lean to the non-genetic camp more so than the genetic. Personal experience tells me that the close mother-son distant father relationship is way more prevalent among gay men to be merely incidental.

Alright what I meant to say earlier about this, and that shows this doesn't really go against the genetics theory, is that IMO, is homosexuality isn't a result of those relationships but rather the other way around. Many gay men feel closer to women and are more interested in developping deep friendly relationships with women rather than men (starting from veryearly childhood). And it's a pretty known and accepted fact, gay men usually idolize strong women figures.

This obviously encourages a closer relationship with the mother than the father.

Adrian.
Dec 28th, 2011, 12:08 AM
http://gifsforum.com/images/gif/fuk%20you/grand/this_thread_is_gay_gif.gif

:oh:

(before the haters want to badrep me, I'm gay myself :p)

pradagirl
Dec 28th, 2011, 03:09 AM
Do you think that pedophiles, necrophiles, zoophiles and other deviants are all born that way?No I think it is a sexual preference, just like being a homosexual.

The penis and the vagina are genetically fit for each other. On the other hand, the anus is to eliminate feces, not to receive a penis.Plain and simple truth.

So if I choose not to have anal sex, that's okay?
What happens when a straight couple has anal sex?The penis is not meant for the anus whether it is a male or female anus. The anus is to eliminate feces.

So you are against oral sex as well? The mouth was not designed to receive a penis, and the protective enzymes of pre-seminal fluid/semen can be very harsh to the esophagus.Very true, oral sex is almost as gross as anal sex. I could never do either. The thought of it makes me want to hurl.

Maybe. Maybe not. Why is that relevant?



Nope, the anus can have more than one purpose.Sorry no the anus only has one true purpose & that is to eliminate feces. Anything else is not the natural way whether male or female.

I laugh at all the people who condemn homosexuality by claiming that only through reproduction can the human species survive.


And who said that the survival of humans is good for the planet/universe and they should live forever? Maybe humans just like dinosaurs and every other species have a birth point and an ending point.So you would rather sacrifice all of mankind to prevent people from condeming homosexuality:help::tape:

Keegan
Dec 28th, 2011, 03:12 AM
Some people in this thread are so frigid it's unreal.

Dominic
Dec 28th, 2011, 03:40 AM
pradagirl is really starting to worry me :sobbing:

shap_half
Dec 28th, 2011, 03:51 AM
pradagirl is really starting to worry me :sobbing:

I reckon it's either a troll or a stupid person.

moby
Dec 28th, 2011, 04:59 AM
I reckon it's either a troll or a stupid person.I suspect a DaMamaJama type troll.

prada-anything is not really compatible with homophobia.

4VRZRQGpkW0

Optima
Dec 28th, 2011, 05:00 AM
The real question is...who fucking cares what causes it? It exists, who gives a damn. The cause is hot men. Even if it was a choice... so what? It's not like all the billions of straight men in the world are going to stop liking boobs and pussy.

ranfurly
Dec 28th, 2011, 06:18 AM
If it wasn't for the likes of Cher, Barbra Streisand, Deanna Durbin, Debbie Reynolds, Bette Midler, Judy Garland, Liza Minnelli, we wouldn't have a gay population.










....;-)

ivanban
Dec 28th, 2011, 06:58 AM
pradagirl :unsure:

JJ Expres
Dec 28th, 2011, 10:23 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erogenous_zone

as you can read in this article there are 3 specific erogenous zone: area of the genitals,perianal skin and lips ,
so i still don't understand why people think that anal sex is a wrong thing to do(or oral) :shrug:

p.s. from this article
The prostate gland may be stimulated from inside the rectum, or by applying pressure on the base of the perineum near the anus. Men who report the sensation of prostate and seminal vesicles stimulation often give descriptions similar to females' accounts of G-spot stimulation

Six Feet Under
Dec 28th, 2011, 11:30 AM
Genetics, i'll stand by this firmly.

Six Feet Under
Dec 28th, 2011, 11:32 AM
I want to hear your opinion.

Ultimate troll thread though :hysteric:

Sammo
Dec 28th, 2011, 12:27 PM
It wasn't intended to be troll, people were like :eek: or :unsure: when I said in another thread that gays shouldn't care about what their parents think because they're the cause of their homosexuality, whether if it's psychological (they raise them) or genetic (who transfers the genes?) or hormonal (who supervises their nutrition?).

Cajka
Dec 28th, 2011, 03:49 PM
:facepalm:
I logged here more than 4 years ago and this is the first time I'm giving bad reputation.
Congrats.

This poster says that he's a gay, so I don't believe that his intention was to offend gay people. It's probably just an ignorance and you can't blame him for that because... This boy is from Serbia and our educational system is still very conservative. In Serbian high school textbooks you can still read that the homosexuality is a disease. So, you can tell that those books are like... 20 or 30 years old. No wonder that people have some terrible prejudices. :shrug:

Javi.
Dec 28th, 2011, 04:32 PM
This poster says that he's a gay, so I don't believe that his intention was to offend gay people. It's probably just an ignorance and you can't blame him for that because... This boy is from Serbia and our educational system is still very conservative. In Serbian high school textbooks you can still read that the homosexuality is a disease. So, you can tell that those books are like... 20 or 30 years old. No wonder that people have some terrible prejudices. :shrug:

Believe me, I understand. Thank you for the explanation. :wavey:
Still, it's so sad that so many people think that way in 21th century.
Even more if the person who thinks that is gay himself.
Many things are yet to change for better.

Mynarco
Dec 28th, 2011, 04:37 PM
This poster says that he's a gay, so I don't believe that his intention was to offend gay people. It's probably just an ignorance and you can't blame him for that because... This boy is from Serbia and our educational system is still very conservative. In Serbian high school textbooks you can still read that the homosexuality is a disease. So, you can tell that those books are like... 20 or 30 years old. No wonder that people have some terrible prejudices. :shrug:

:tape:

Javi.
Dec 28th, 2011, 04:50 PM
Actually, here in Spain, recently has been published a book about how to cure homosexuality.
But there have been so much pressure from groups of people through Internet, that the biggest Department stores in Spain, El Corte Inglés, has apologized and announced that they will take the book away from its stores.

Fighterpova
Dec 28th, 2011, 06:09 PM
This poster says that he's a gay, so I don't believe that his intention was to offend gay people. It's probably just an ignorance and you can't blame him for that because... This boy is from Serbia and our educational system is still very conservative. In Serbian high school textbooks you can still read that the homosexuality is a disease. So, you can tell that those books are like... 20 or 30 years old. No wonder that people have some terrible prejudices. :shrug:

You've got to be kidding me :spit: :help:

First of all, I never intended to offend any gay people as I am one as well. I only stated that it's some kind of abnormality(behavior wise), but I never said it was bad or not normal, seriously people make such a big deal over it.

Anyway, how can you call me ignorant, I just have an opinion on the matter and I'm sure you know no more about homosexuality than me. Nobody knows the real cause of it :shrug:

GoofyDuck
Dec 28th, 2011, 06:19 PM
I believe that when a human is born, this little child knows nothing. Doesn't know what language to speak, what to eat nor what he/she should love.
While growing up you are being taught (indoctrinated) guys should like girls.


I mean: There is nobody in the entire world that tells his little kid to become gay.
For some unknown reason, most likely because of the people that influence you, This message doesn't get through entirely.
you just get feelings for guys that you don't get for girls. DESPITE KNOWING YOU SHOULD HAVE IT FOR GIRLS.


At this point it is just to late, this feeling can not change, I'm sure alot of people tried to and wished it would.

Javi.
Dec 28th, 2011, 06:21 PM
You've got to be kidding me :spit: :help:

First of all, I never intended to offend any gay people as I am one as well. I only stated that it's some kind of abnormality(behavior wise), but I never said it was bad or not normal, seriously people make such a big deal over it.

Anyway, how can you call me ignorant, I just have an opinion on the matter and I'm sure you know no more about homosexuality than me. Nobody knows the real cause of it :shrug:

Certain brain abnormalities, as an explanation for being homosexual, does not sounds good, you know. I think it's actually offensive, even though it wasn't your intention. What do you really mean with that unfortunate expression?
Probably I made a big deal of it, but still.

Kart
Dec 28th, 2011, 07:31 PM
This thread reminds me that I need to cull in the new year.

Vincey!
Dec 28th, 2011, 08:17 PM
Do you think that pedophiles, necrophiles, zoophiles and other deviants are all born that way?

Even tho I think your comparison is quite shady and judgmental, it is a proven fact that psychopath are genetically program to be like that. A part of their brain is missing, pushing them to do things or simply inhibitate the emotion part of their brain. So those other deviants are proven to be genetically like that, not their fault, surely not good and that's a problem BUT homosexuality as you link that with "deviant" people can be genetic judged on your own argument. The difference is that homosexual won't kill you in your sleep, or rape your child or getting sodomised by your dog. :shrug: Therefore no reason to be punished or being a lower class. I'm sure you have nothing against people who never have been in a relationship and they don't want to, cuz there's some people who are not attracted to anybody, that even tho they are not reproducing themselves, therefore not doin what they've been genetically programed for.

Oh and your anal/penis/vagina argument just showed how misinformed you are lol. Gay people are not gay cuz they want to put their penis in a anus instead of a vagina. Gay people are gay cuz they are attracted to the male body, as straight people are straight cuz they are attracted by the female body. There are many straight couple doing anal, or many girls using toys even tho their vagina is not programmed to received a plasty dolphin :shrug:. As your body was not programmed to masturbate, it's not its purpose. Netheir is using condom, so if you follow your own thinking you'd have almost as many kids as the number of time you had sex in your life.

Sammo
Dec 28th, 2011, 08:37 PM
This thread reminds me that I need to cull in the new year.


http://d37nnnqwv9amwr.cloudfront.net/photos/images/original/000/109/173/hhhgggf.jpg

Dominic
Dec 28th, 2011, 08:41 PM
This thread reminds me that I need to cull in the new year.

cull what?

Sammo
Dec 28th, 2011, 08:48 PM
Me I guess :unsure:

http://mlkshk.com/r/1XWH

Dominic
Dec 28th, 2011, 09:02 PM
Well he's right about that

Sammo
Dec 28th, 2011, 09:10 PM
Look who is talking, and I've never even been between TF's 10 biggest trolls :o

Dominic
Dec 28th, 2011, 09:18 PM
That shouldn't be too long, now that ppl are starting to know about you and your superiority complex and your "subtle" homophobia :lol:

Soliloque
Dec 28th, 2011, 09:22 PM
Look who is talking, and I've never even been between TF's 10 biggest trolls :o

You're almost a lock for TWAT next year though :oh:

Sammo
Dec 28th, 2011, 09:28 PM
That shouldn't be too long, now that ppl are starting to know about you and your superiority complex and your "subtle" homophobia :lol:

http://d37nnnqwv9amwr.cloudfront.net/photos/images/original/000/112/480/OpoQQ.jpg?1302279568

Nicolás89
Dec 28th, 2011, 09:49 PM
I don't know about the subtle homophobia part but you did admit that you kind of had a superiority complex in another thread. :o

Sammo
Dec 28th, 2011, 10:04 PM
Whatever, I discriminate everyone who isn't black, jew and gay.


Now seriously I already explained the superiority thing and as people only read what they want to read :)

Dominic
Dec 28th, 2011, 10:08 PM
Now seriously I already explained the superiority thing and as people only read what they want to read :)

Yes you explained that you clearly had a superiority complex for really silly reasons. There is nothing else to know

Sammo
Dec 28th, 2011, 10:10 PM
Superiority complex with the people of my age.

ampers&
Dec 28th, 2011, 10:28 PM
How old are you Sammo?

Stamp Paid
Dec 28th, 2011, 10:36 PM
How old are you Sammo?http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lwfcnsmvJr1ql5yr7o1_400.gif

Cajka
Dec 28th, 2011, 10:44 PM
You've got to be kidding me :spit: :help:

First of all, I never intended to offend any gay people as I am one as well. I only stated that it's some kind of abnormality(behavior wise), but I never said it was bad or not normal, seriously people make such a big deal over it.

Anyway, how can you call me ignorant, I just have an opinion on the matter and I'm sure you know no more about homosexuality than me. Nobody knows the real cause of it :shrug:

You don't understand what I said, right? OK, I apologize to other posters.

Napisao si da je homoseksualnost poremećaj, nešto abnormalno, pa si i sam primetio kakve si odgovore na taj komentar dobio. Ja sam rekla da je u pitanju neznanje, a ne govor mržnje. Ne znam zašto se ljutiš. Već određeno vreme homoseksualnost nije na SZO-voj listi bolesti i poremećaja. Nesrećnim slučajem, u našoj zemlji postoje vrlo zastareli udžbenici za srednje škole u kojima se homoseksualnost još uvek objašnjava kao bolest, još kad se na to dodaju postojeće predrasude, nije ni čudo što većina ljudi u Srbiji ima potpuno pogrešan stav o homoseksualnosti.

Nisam nikad bila homoseksualac, pa ne znam kako je biti u tvojoj koži. Ali jednu stvar znam. Ako ti, kao homoseksualac, misliš da je to nešto bolesno, abnormalno, potrebno je pod hitno da menjaš stav o tome. Ne znam kako planiraš da živiš svoj život misleći o sebi kao o nekome ko je poremećen ili izopačen. To je kao kad bih ja mislila da su žene inferiorne, gluplje i lošije od muškaraca i da je OK da me neko bije ili ponižava zato što sam žensko.

Sammo
Dec 28th, 2011, 10:55 PM
How old are you Sammo?

I'm 17.

Fighterpova
Dec 28th, 2011, 11:50 PM
You don't understand what I said, right? OK, I apologize to other posters.

Napisao si da je homoseksualnost poremećaj, nešto abnormalno, pa si i sam primetio kakve si odgovore na taj komentar dobio. Ja sam rekla da je u pitanju neznanje, a ne govor mržnje. Ne znam zašto se ljutiš. Već određeno vreme homoseksualnost nije na SZO-voj listi bolesti i poremećaja. Nesrećnim slučajem, u našoj zemlji postoje vrlo zastareli udžbenici za srednje škole u kojima se homoseksualnost još uvek objašnjava kao bolest, još kad se na to dodaju postojeće predrasude, nije ni čudo što većina ljudi u Srbiji ima potpuno pogrešan stav o homoseksualnosti.

Nisam nikad bila homoseksualac, pa ne znam kako je biti u tvojoj koži. Ali jednu stvar znam. Ako ti, kao homoseksualac, misliš da je to nešto bolesno, abnormalno, potrebno je pod hitno da menjaš stav o tome. Ne znam kako planiraš da živiš svoj život misleći o sebi kao o nekome ko je poremećen ili izopačen. To je kao kad bih ja mislila da su žene inferiorne, gluplje i lošije od muškaraca i da je OK da me neko bije ili ponižava zato što sam žensko.


:help: :haha:
Ja sam sebe prihvatio takav kakav sam i potpuno sam zadovoljan svojim izgledom i svojom seksualnoscu :lol:
Nikad nisam rekao da je to bolesno il izopaceno, samo sam rekao da je poremecaj(ne bukvalno, vise kao razlika) u ponasanju, misleci na seksualno ponasanje, sto je cinjenica.Razlika u seksualnom ponasanju I nije uopste ni strasno ni nista kao sto ljudi misle :lol: Gay is Ok :D

ivanban
Dec 28th, 2011, 11:55 PM
:help: :haha:
Ja sam sebe prihvatio takav kakav sam i potpuno sam zadovoljan svojim izgledom i svojom seksualnoscu :lol:
Nikad nisam rekao da je to bolesno il izopaceno, samo sam rekao da je poremecaj(ne bukvalno, vise kao razlika) u ponasanju, misleci na seksualno ponasanje, sto je cinjenica.Razlika u seksualnom ponasanju I nije uopste ni strasno ni nista kao sto ljudi misle :lol: Gay is Ok :D

:confused: Gurl, you need to speak more clearly to be understood better

Cajka
Dec 29th, 2011, 12:09 AM
:help: :haha:
Ja sam sebe prihvatio takav kakav sam i potpuno sam zadovoljan svojim izgledom i svojom seksualnoscu :lol:
Nikad nisam rekao da je to bolesno il izopaceno, samo sam rekao da je poremecaj(ne bukvalno, vise kao razlika) u ponasanju, misleci na seksualno ponasanje, sto je cinjenica.Razlika u seksualnom ponasanju I nije uopste ni strasno ni nista kao sto ljudi misle :lol: Gay is Ok :D

:confused: Gurl, you need to speak more clearly to be understood better

But sexuality is not a behavior, someone pointed that out already. There's not such thing as homosexual or heterosexual behavior. A sexuality doesn't determine you as a person. As soon as people accept it, there will be less stereotypes.

Fighterpova
Dec 29th, 2011, 12:15 AM
But sexuality is not a behavior, someone pointed that out already. There's not such thing as homosexual or heterosexual behavior. A sexuality doesn't determine you as a person. As soon as people accept it, there will be less stereotypes.

You clearly don't understand me. I am done arguing with you.
Just let it go and enjoy TF :lol:

Fighterpova
Dec 29th, 2011, 12:23 AM
Give me a break guys :tape:

I just recently hatched from the gay egg :angel: :lol:

Cajka
Dec 29th, 2011, 12:28 AM
You clearly don't understand me. I am done arguing with you.
Just let it go and enjoy TF :lol:

Not every discussion is fighting and I didn't want to fight with you. People attacked you because you didn't express your opinion in the best possible way, so I assumed that it was an ignorance. And it seems that I offended you by saying that. If you ask me, it's always better to be considered an ignorant than to be considered a judgemental homophobic jerk, but it's your choice. Many people attacked you here, I actually defended you, but whatever. :shrug:

Helen Lawson
Dec 29th, 2011, 01:16 AM
I think God makes people gay to punish them, but I don't know why.

ampers&
Dec 29th, 2011, 01:48 AM
I'm 17.Dead. Okay. :crying2:

Pops Maellard
Dec 29th, 2011, 04:49 AM
I think God makes people gay to punish them, but I don't know why.
i know you're not totally serious here, but from the Christian point of view this isn't such a silly notion.

Throughout the Christian Bible God screwed many people over so that their faith would be tested (book of Job fo starters), but even if this were to be true it certainly wouldn't be fair :angel:.

Monzanator
Dec 29th, 2011, 08:24 AM
Do some of the LGBT people know that not every straight person follows the Bible and actually throwing God into the whole thing is ridiculous? I know LGBT need to enhance their global position, but seriously :tape: Homosexuality is not a disease but the modern world hasn't cracked every single function of a human brain and it's all down to this. If anyone can claim the full knowledge of human brain, then good luck, but I'll pass :lol: All the religious stuff here should be left aside :shrug:

Kart
Dec 29th, 2011, 08:49 AM
Me I guess :unsure:

http://mlkshk.com/r/1XWH

Frankly, I don't really know who you are as I've not been here much of late.

However, if you do decide to vie for my attention in the future, make sure you're able to deal with the consequences.

Helen Lawson
Dec 29th, 2011, 08:55 AM
i know you're not totally serious here, but from the Christian point of view this isn't such a silly notion.

Throughout the Christian Bible God screwed many people over so that their faith would be tested (book of Job fo starters), but even if this were to be true it certainly wouldn't be fair :angel:.

I didn't say it was fair. But it certainly is a challenge. I think God loves all of his people, but being gay is not an easy thing for most people.

Pops Maellard
Dec 29th, 2011, 09:10 AM
I didn't say it was fair. But it certainly is a challenge. I think God loves all of his people, but being gay is not an easy thing for most people.
Oh well, I call his bluff :oh:. If he made me gay he can live with it :oh:.

ivanban
Dec 29th, 2011, 09:13 AM
The penis and the vagina are genetically fit for each other. On the other hand, the anus is to eliminate feces, not to receive a penis.

So, if someone has really big penis or too narrow vagina - they should be gay? :confused:

Ellen Dawson
Dec 29th, 2011, 11:38 AM
Caroline Wozniacki. :D

Why not?! She gets blamed for everything else. :bolt:

Dominic
Dec 29th, 2011, 02:15 PM
Do some of the LGBT people know that not every straight person follows the Bible and actually throwing God into the whole thing is ridiculous? I know LGBT need to enhance their global position, but seriously :tape: Homosexuality is not a disease but the modern world hasn't cracked every single function of a human brain and it's all down to this. If anyone can claim the full knowledge of human brain, then good luck, but I'll pass :lol: All the religious stuff here should be left aside :shrug:

What are you talking about!? "It's written in the bible" is the main argument of old minded overly conservative bigots to justify their homophobia.

Mikey.
Dec 29th, 2011, 03:57 PM
I firmly believe it has to do with genetic "predispositions" in combination with environmental influences.

However at Uni we touched on various scientific studies which were quite interesting. The one I remember well was the one about a mother's antibodies destroying the "foreign" male hormones in the blood of her unborn son through the placenta. All human males start as female by default as they begin developing inside the mother. So this theory suggests the result is an underdeveloped "male brain" in the son because it did not receive the appropriate amount of male hormone during development. Another similar theory was based on the fact that with every son born, the chance of him being gay increased. This was thought to be caused by the mother's immune system increasing its effectiveness in detecting and destroying any male hormones with every time it encounters them during proceeding pregnancies. I don't know what I really think about these though as I haven't really researched them in that much depth. Like why would the brain only be affected and not any of the other physical characteristics? Maybe it's only a slight alteration in hormone levels and that can be enough to change the brain quite drastically? These are things I need to look into. I really find this quite fascinating. :lol:

So anyway I just thought I'd share a little about my family too. In my family we have three boys. The oldest (me) and youngest are gay, while the middle one is straight. And we definitely fit into the dominant-mother distant-father family model. Obviously you can't definitively confirm anything from our situation but we were all raised in the exact same environment. And us gay sons were ALWAYS different in similar ways from the straight son. So it sort of suggests, to me anyway, there must also be some other underlying biological process in play here as well. Like for example my youngest brother and I possibly received a gene (or genes) from our parents which caused us to be more "susceptible" to becoming gay. (Sorry for not using better words here.) Then the environment which we were brought up in ensured we did in fact become gay. While the middle brother by chance did not receive this/these gene/s and was not as susceptible to becoming gay, therefore wasn't really affected by the environment and grew as a straight son. I don't know really, but it seems like it could work.

(And Yeah I sort of just came out then, if anyone even still remembered me calling myself "straight" on here. :spit: Another one bites the dust! :lol:)

Slutiana
Dec 29th, 2011, 04:32 PM
I firmly believe it has to do with genetic "predispositions" in combination with environmental influences.

However at Uni we touched on various scientific studies which were quite interesting. The one I remember well was the one about a mother's antibodies destroying the "foreign" male hormones in the blood of her unborn son through the placenta. All human males start as female by default as they begin developing inside the mother. So this theory suggests the result is an underdeveloped "male brain" in the son because it did not receive the appropriate amount of male hormone during development. Another similar theory was based on the fact that with every son born, the chance of him being gay increased. This was thought to be caused by the mother's immune system increasing its effectiveness in detecting and destroying any male hormones with every time it encounters them during proceeding pregnancies. I don't know what I really think about these though as I haven't really researched them in that much depth. Like why would the brain only be affected and not any of the other physical characteristics? Maybe it's only a slight alteration in hormone levels and that can be enough to change the brain quite drastically? These are things I need to look into. I really find this quite fascinating. :lol:

So anyway I just thought I'd share a little about my family too. In my family we have three boys. The oldest (me) and youngest are gay, while the middle one is straight. And we definitely fit into the dominant-mother distant-father family model. Obviously you can't definitively confirm anything from our situation but we were all raised in the exact same environment. And us gay sons were ALWAYS different in similar ways from the straight son. So it sort of suggests, to me anyway, there must also be some other underlying biological process in play here as well. Like for example my youngest brother and I possibly received a gene (or genes) from our parents which caused us to be more "susceptible" to becoming gay. (Sorry for not using better words here.) Then the environment which we were brought up in ensured we did in fact become gay. While the middle brother by chance did not receive this/these gene/s and was not as susceptible to becoming gay, therefore wasn't really affected by the environment and grew as a straight son. I don't know really, but it seems like it could work.

(And Yeah I sort of just came out then, if anyone even still remembered me calling myself "straight" on here. :spit: Another one bites the dust! :lol:)
:eek: Mikey spilling the tea! By far the most informative/insightful post in the thread.

Mistress of Evil
Dec 29th, 2011, 04:43 PM
I firmly believe it has to do with genetic "predispositions" in combination with environmental influences.

However at Uni we touched on various scientific studies which were quite interesting. The one I remember well was the one about a mother's antibodies destroying the "foreign" male hormones in the blood of her unborn son through the placenta. All human males start as female by default as they begin developing inside the mother. So this theory suggests the result is an underdeveloped "male brain" in the son because it did not receive the appropriate amount of male hormone during development. Another similar theory was based on the fact that with every son born, the chance of him being gay increased. This was thought to be caused by the mother's immune system increasing its effectiveness in detecting and destroying any male hormones with every time it encounters them during proceeding pregnancies. I don't know what I really think about these though as I haven't really researched them in that much depth. Like why would the brain only be affected and not any of the other physical characteristics? Maybe it's only a slight alteration in hormone levels and that can be enough to change the brain quite drastically? These are things I need to look into. I really find this quite fascinating. :lol:

So anyway I just thought I'd share a little about my family too. In my family we have three boys. The oldest (me) and youngest are gay, while the middle one is straight. And we definitely fit into the dominant-mother distant-father family model. Obviously you can't definitively confirm anything from our situation but we were all raised in the exact same environment. And us gay sons were ALWAYS different in similar ways from the straight son. So it sort of suggests, to me anyway, there must also be some other underlying biological process in play here as well. Like for example my youngest brother and I possibly received a gene (or genes) from our parents which caused us to be more "susceptible" to becoming gay. (Sorry for not using better words here.) Then the environment which we were brought up in ensured we did in fact become gay. While the middle brother by chance did not receive this/these gene/s and was not as susceptible to becoming gay, therefore wasn't really affected by the environment and grew as a straight son. I don't know really, but it seems like it could work.

(And Yeah I sort of just came out then, if anyone even still remembered me calling myself "straight" on here. :spit: Another one bites the dust! :lol:)

At first ...

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lj7da9Tdlj1qafrh6.gif

and then ...

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lj7bxh41MM1qafrh6.png

fantic
Dec 29th, 2011, 05:12 PM
I think 'why so many women tennis fans are gay' is a more fun question :shrug:

Bourbon
Dec 29th, 2011, 07:03 PM
Why people need to find a way to explain everything?
It just happens. We are all people, straight, guy or bisex, and we shouldn't take care of our sexual taste.

Moveyourfeet
Dec 29th, 2011, 09:09 PM
I firmly believe it has to do with genetic "predispositions" in combination with environmental influences.

However at Uni we touched on various scientific studies which were quite interesting. The one I remember well was the one about a mother's antibodies destroying the "foreign" male hormones in the blood of her unborn son through the placenta. All human males start as female by default as they begin developing inside the mother. So this theory suggests the result is an underdeveloped "male brain" in the son because it did not receive the appropriate amount of male hormone during development. Another similar theory was based on the fact that with every son born, the chance of him being gay increased. This was thought to be caused by the mother's immune system increasing its effectiveness in detecting and destroying any male hormones with every time it encounters them during proceeding pregnancies.

This is one of the studies I referenced earlier as only holding for male homosexuality.

Sammo
Dec 29th, 2011, 09:20 PM
Why people need to find a way to explain everything?
It just happens. We are all people, straight, guy or bisex, and we shouldn't take care of our sexual taste.

If we didn't have this curiosity we would still think that thunders are caused by gods.

Sean.
Dec 29th, 2011, 11:42 PM
According to Kuznetsova, you 'become' gay because you're lonely:

You played doubles with the legendary Martina Navratilova. Didn't it bother you that she's a lesbian? And it's not only her, is it? Amelie Mauresmo, Conchita Martinez, Mary Joe Fernandez - the list goes on. Does the pro tennis promote same-sex love?

I've thought about it more than once. In fact, there is a problem. I think some of the players become that way because of loneliness. I like Amelie Mauresmo, I trained with her coach at one point - the Frenchman Loic Courteau. When I found out that Amelie's not interested in men, I was shocked. However, I don't want to judge anyone. It's their life.

http://eg.ru/daily/sports/26753/

Isn't Fernandez married with kids? :lol:

Vincey!
Dec 29th, 2011, 11:54 PM
I firmly believe it has to do with genetic "predispositions" in combination with environmental influences.

However at Uni we touched on various scientific studies which were quite interesting. The one I remember well was the one about a mother's antibodies destroying the "foreign" male hormones in the blood of her unborn son through the placenta. All human males start as female by default as they begin developing inside the mother. So this theory suggests the result is an underdeveloped "male brain" in the son because it did not receive the appropriate amount of male hormone during development. Another similar theory was based on the fact that with every son born, the chance of him being gay increased. This was thought to be caused by the mother's immune system increasing its effectiveness in detecting and destroying any male hormones with every time it encounters them during proceeding pregnancies. I don't know what I really think about these though as I haven't really researched them in that much depth. Like why would the brain only be affected and not any of the other physical characteristics? Maybe it's only a slight alteration in hormone levels and that can be enough to change the brain quite drastically? These are things I need to look into. I really find this quite fascinating. :lol:

So anyway I just thought I'd share a little about my family too. In my family we have three boys. The oldest (me) and youngest are gay, while the middle one is straight. And we definitely fit into the dominant-mother distant-father family model. Obviously you can't definitively confirm anything from our situation but we were all raised in the exact same environment. And us gay sons were ALWAYS different in similar ways from the straight son. So it sort of suggests, to me anyway, there must also be some other underlying biological process in play here as well. Like for example my youngest brother and I possibly received a gene (or genes) from our parents which caused us to be more "susceptible" to becoming gay. (Sorry for not using better words here.) Then the environment which we were brought up in ensured we did in fact become gay. While the middle brother by chance did not receive this/these gene/s and was not as susceptible to becoming gay, therefore wasn't really affected by the environment and grew as a straight son. I don't know really, but it seems like it could work.

(And Yeah I sort of just came out then, if anyone even still remembered me calling myself "straight" on here. :spit: Another one bites the dust! :lol:)

I heard the same thing! We are indeed all "female" at some points, from what I remember learning the difference in a male and female baby is the amont of testosterone produce at some point. It can pretty much be altered or mis produced as nature ain't perfect and other "malfunctions" happen all the time. This is a real cause to me. On the other I'm not sure about the fact that more son you have more are the chance the younger one would be homosexual. It does make sense to me since it's true women produce that kind of antibodies, but it cannot be the nly explaination since the first male baby couldn't be gay or if the first male baby is gay that wuld almost necessarly mean the younger one would be too but that's not the case. It is also proven that most twin will be gay if their other twin is. That's another proof that homosexuality is not a choice for sure to me.

delicatecutter
Dec 30th, 2011, 12:10 AM
According to Kuznetsova, you 'become' gay because you're lonely:



Isn't Fernandez married with kids? :lol:

Yes. :sobbing: Sveta isn't gay? :unsure:

Six Feet Under
Dec 30th, 2011, 12:14 AM
Caroline Wozniacki. :D

Why not?! She gets blamed for everything else. :bolt:

:lol:

Sean.
Dec 30th, 2011, 12:26 AM
Yes. :sobbing: Sveta isn't gay? :unsure:

Apparently not, she talks about the qualities she looks for in guys in the interview.

delicatecutter
Dec 30th, 2011, 12:28 AM
How old is the interview?

Sean.
Dec 30th, 2011, 12:29 AM
31st July this year.

WowWow
Dec 30th, 2011, 12:30 AM
Quote:
You played doubles with the legendary Martina Navratilova. Didn't it bother you that she's a lesbian? And it's not only her, is it? Amelie Mauresmo, Conchita Martinez, Mary Joe Fernandez - the list goes on. Does the pro tennis promote same-sex love?

I've thought about it more than once. In fact, there is a problem. I think some of the players become that way because of loneliness. I like Amelie Mauresmo, I trained with her coach at one point - the Frenchman Loic Courteau. When I found out that Amelie's not interested in men, I was shocked. However, I don't want to judge anyone. It's their life.

http://eg.ru/daily/sports/26753/

Right, cause Amelie really gives off the straight vibe :lol:

delicatecutter
Dec 30th, 2011, 12:34 AM
31st July this year.

I'm shocked. :speakles:

ToopsTame
Dec 30th, 2011, 01:51 AM
Quote:


Right, cause Amelie really gives off the straight vibe :lol:

I'm not sure what was dumber. The question the reporter asked or the answer Sveta gave. :lol: