[B0ycey]

If they are random, that would be an interesting fact as well and random processes can be investigated just like deterministic ones. It's actually quite possible that there's a random element to our behaviour and thoughts which is why I mentioned probabilistic constraints in an earlier post.

Well it would be an interesting fact, but to become a fact you need to eliminate everything. And that is unlikely going to happen due to everything being an awful lot. So a waste of study IMO over something that is trivial.

Nonetheless being random does have more evidence to it than genetics, nurture and culture - some of things being speculated on this thread. How is it possible for identical twins with the same background having different sexual orientation if any of these things are a factor? Perhaps answer that rather than debating Walrus mating rituals.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Well it would be an interesting fact, but to become a fact you need to eliminate everything. And that is unlikely going to happen due to everything being an awful lot. So a waste of study IMO over something that is trivial.

You don't need to "eliminate everything" and complexity is no reason to give up and not investigate. If we all had your attitude we'd still be living in caves.

Nonetheless being random does have more evidence to it than genetics, nurture and culture - some of things being speculated on this thread. How is it possible for identical twins with the same background having different sexual orientation if any of these things are a factor?

The answer obviously is that genes are not the whole story. That was easy.

Now you might want to answer why identical twins are more similar than dizygotic twins which are in turn more similar than siblings, and why twins turn out to be similar even if they are raised apart.

[B0ycey]

You don't need to "eliminate everything" and complexity is no reason to give up and not investigate. If we all had your attitude we'd still be living in caves.

Not really. Maybe more advanced as I think more time should be spent on things that actually matter.

The answer obviously is that genes are not the whole story. That was easy.

Now you might want to answer why identical twins are more similar than dizygotic twins which are in turn more similar than siblings, and why twins turn out to be similar even if they are raised apart.

Genetics. That was easy. But we are not discussing that.

FYI I never said that genetics are the whole story. In fact, I even said randomness has more evidence to support it than genetics. Although that doesn't stop people claiming genetics are a factor in what makes people homosexual. So if you think it is a factor, why twins have different sexualities to one another is a question you need to answer.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Not really. Maybe more advanced as I think more time should be spent on things that actually matter.

People matter most. Everything in our societies is shaped by people and their thoughts, preferences and actions.

But regardless, your desire that we should not try to understand ourselves is doomed to failure anyway, because humans are naturally curious creatures and unique in their capacity to investigate themselves. There's been no time in history when humans have refrained from doing so, and today our technology is advanced enough for us to make rapid progress. There's no way this can be stopped now and it will likely revolutionise our understanding.

Genetics. That was easy. But we are not discussing that.

FYI I never said that genetics are the whole story. In fact, I even said randomness has more evidence to support it hand genetics. Although that doesn't stop people claiming genetics are a factor in what makes people homosexual. So if it a factor that is a question you need to answer.

I'm not entirely sure about you, but I'm discussing human behaviour, feelings and thoughts and to do this we have to include all factors.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, based on the evidence available, homosexuality is somewhat heritable. There's recently been a study that claimed to have identified some of the genes that are involved in predisposing people for homosexuality. There's apparently also a possibility that birth order plays a role, although that finding needs independent replication. There are almost certainly also environmental influences some of which could indeed be random but we don't know that yet.

[Political Interest]

I doubt this is true.

So you think being homosexual is some easy experience, some type of fanciful walk in the park?

And even if it were true, I am certain that the condemnation and bigotry from people who disagree with homosexuality would make things worse.

But did you not consider possibility that a lot of homosexuals would want to be heterosexual and especially young homosexuals, i.e. teenagers are confused by what they are experiencing?

[B0ycey]

I'm not entirely sure about you, but I'm discussing human behaviour, feelings and thoughts and to do this we have to include all factors.

For sure, but that doesn't stop that fact that there maybe no scientific truth, the whole point of our debate.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

For sure, but that doesn't stop that fact that there maybe no scientific truth, the whole point of our debate.

I've already responded to this. Even if all of it was random, that would be an interesting discovery in itself. However, we can discount this possibility as extremely unlikely anyway, as we already have good evidence for a genetic component. We also have some knowledge about the chemicals and biological pathways involved in shaping feelings and behaviour in humans.

[B0ycey]

I've already responded to this. Even if all of it was random, that would be an interesting discovery in itself. However, we can discount this possibility as extremely unlikely anyway, as we already have good evidence for a genetic component. We also have some knowledge about the chemicals and biological pathways involved in shaping feelings and behaviour in humans.

I have read your link. It supports a genetic link to Homosexuality but it isn't conclusive. The two genes are only more common in homosexual males and it isn't exclusive to them either. So if this is your opinion, then you have evidence. But you cannot conclusively say that it is a scientific truth or that it will lead to one as it is primitive and definately not absolute to say the least. Not to mention it asks more questions than it answers. Like why don't all homosexuals have these genes.

[Pants-of-dog]

So you think being homosexual is some easy experience, some type of fanciful walk in the park?

That depends on what you are talking about. If you are talking about simply being attracted to, and having sex with, people of the same sex, then I assume it is as easy as heterosexuality.

If you are talking about also having to deal with discrimination and bigotry, then I assume that can be quite difficult. But that is not anout whether or not homosexuality is hard, but instead is about whether or not living with homophobia is hard.

But did you not consider possibility that a lot of homosexuals would want to be heterosexual and especially young homosexuals, i.e. teenagers are confused by what they are experiencing?

Of course that is true. And this is because of heteronormativity and ignorance, not because homosexuality is hard or wrong.

Please note that if you think that homosexuals would want to be heterosexual but for some reason cannot, you are implicitly arguing that homosexuality is not a choice.

[noemon]

If you are talking about also having to deal with discrimination and bigotry, then I assume that can be quite difficult. But that is not anout whether or not homosexuality is hard, but instead is about whether or not living with homophobia is hard.

What do you think is worse for a person, receiving a homophobic or bullying comment by one of their peers such as for example "you homo" or "you fatso" or "you're ugly" or seeing the disappointment in their parents faces for not getting good enough grades, or for example declaring to them that they will never see a grandchild? Are people homophobic and bigoted for wanting to see grandchildren from their children? Are parents violent when they get disappointed by the behaviour of their children? Should people always receive positive feedback for their actions?

Of course that is true. And this is because of heteronormativity and ignorance, not because homosexuality is hard or wrong.

What is right and wrong is entirely dependent on what kind of moral system one adheres to. Different moral systems produce different social structures and consequently different societies. Homosexual acts are not inherently bad just like other sexual activities(cheating, swinging, sharing, cucking) are not inherently bad either just like violent acts are not inherently bad either, violence in defence for example is not only moral but also welcome.

heteronormativity

Just now I went to open the telly so I can eat a sandwich without bothering my wife in bed, I very rarely watch TV and that is only for brief moments so I switched on the telly and Big Brother's Last Bit was playing so I am watching it while eating my sandwich, this show is commenting about Big Brother, the host is gay, his assistant is gay, the audience is made only of gay people(the majority of them transgender), the guest stars are all gay and they currently have a comedian on stage who is making only gay jokes about the pleasures of sucking dick. I am watching this right now as I am typing this and also partly the reason as to why I decided to go ahead and actually type this. At work at least 40% of my coworkers are gay, 1 of them extremely outspoken and flamboyant that gropes me whenever he gets a chance. He has become a close friend so we all(incl. my wife) take it as a joke but other people could be more bothered, other people could turn violent or even take legal action. He told me that it is his conviction that he turned gay because his brothers did not include him in their sport activities and decided to become an anti-boy. I have another friend who introduced herself to me as a lesbian 6 years ago and once she broke up with her girlfriend(4 years ago) she forgot about lesbianism utterly and completely, now she gets offended if you even mention it to her, prior to that breakup that was all she ever knew. I do not see anything heteronormative in my everyday life. Homosexuality is not just something out there but it's both trending and trendy and that is a social phenomenon that is not immune to either commentary or criticism. Like other trends it has its pros and cons. Don't you agree?

[Kaiserschmarrn]

I have read your link. It supports a genetic link to Homosexuality but it isn't conclusive. The two genes are only more common in homosexual males and it isn't exclusive to them either. So if this is your opinion, then you have evidence. But you cannot conclusively say that it is a scientific truth or that it will lead to one as it is primitive and definately not absolute to say the least. Not to mention it asks more questions than it answers. Like why don't all homosexuals have these genes.

As mentioned this is not the only evidence. For more evidence of genetic influences on homosexual behaviour see here, here, here (pdf) and here. For evidence of the effect of genes on human traits more generally see this paper and their tool.

Also, nobody claims that these two genes are the only ones or that they must be present in all homosexuals. There could be different combinations of genes conferring varying degrees of predisposition. This is also obviously not the final result of research but just the beginning. And again, genes don't exclusively determine anything in humans and hence the fact that these genes aren't exclusive to homosexuals isn't a counter-argument.

At this stage, our default position ought to be that we should expect at least some genetic contribution to all human traits (maybe even homophobia). As far as the evidence goes, it's really very unlikely that this turns out to be wrong. Open questions are how accurate our current estimates are and how it all works in detail.

[B0ycey]

As mentioned this is not the only evidence. For more evidence of genetic influences on homosexual behaviour see here, here, here (pdf) and here. For evidence of the effect of genes on human traits more generally see this paper and their tool.

Also, nobody claims that these two genes are the only ones or that they must be present in all homosexuals. There could be different combinations of genes conferring varying degrees of predisposition. This is also obviously not the final result of research but just the beginning. And again, genes don't exclusively determine anything in humans and hence the fact that these genes aren't exclusive to homosexuals isn't a counter-argument.

At this stage, our default position ought to be that we should expect at least some genetic contribution to all human traits (maybe even homophobia). As far as the evidence goes, it's really very unlikely that this turns out to be wrong. Open questions are how accurate our current estimates are and how it all works in detail.

Seems like @One Degree's "common knowledge" of Homosexuality being cultural can be put to bed as bollocks if the evidence points to genetics Kaiserschmarrn.

Although as I have always assumed that Homosexuality was a mental process, to find genetic similarities isn't really surprising to me. Until a dinfinitive can be shown there still may never be a scientific truth and randomness remains possible, especially when all genetic links can be associated with either sexual orientation. Although another thing yet to be addressed by you is why identical twins who were brought up together have different sexual orientations. That would imply randomness as the conditions are the same but the results are different btw.

[Nonsense]

Like other trends it has its pros and cons. Don't you agree?

NONSENSE- Whatever turns you on I guess.

For me, as a male, I was always turned on by females from a very, very early age, I have never, ever felt any different, even at my age.

I prefer female company, both physically & conversationally.

Women are better communicators, even if they are more emotional in their views, for which I try to inject a judicious amount of logic, just to put things in their proper perspective or context, without any intent at dominating or controlling any debate.
I try to 'educate' them in subtle ways, as opposed to unduly influencing them, I know if that tactic works over time, by any variation in their past & present views.

Men tend to be more direct, women are more circumspect in their views, as such, we men have to properly listen to what they are saying.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Seems like @One Degree's "common knowledge" of Homosexuality being cultural can be put to bed as bollocks if the evidence points to genetics Kaiserschmarrn.

Although as I have always assumed that Homosexuality was a mental process, to find genetic similarities isn't really surprising to me. Until a dinfinitive can be shown there still may never be a scientific truth and randomness remains possible, especially when all genetic links can be associated with either sexual orientation.

Your post makes no sense. I'm starting to wonder if you actually read anything I write.

Nothing I've written precludes the possibility of a cultural element. Is it really so difficult to understand that it doesn't have to be one or the other exclusively? I would also be surprised if those two were the only factors.

[B0ycey]

Your post makes no sense. I'm starting to wonder if you actually read anything I write.

Nothing I've written precludes the possibility of a cultural element. Is it really so difficult to understand that it doesn't have to be one or the other exclusively? I would also be surprised if those two were the only factors.

I see you skip over the question of mutual culture and genetics with polar sexual orientation when you quote.

Whether you personally exclude the possibility of culture being the basis of Homosexuality or not, your evidence doesn't support this. So any conclusion you reach is subjective and highly questionable - especially from an anti progressive activist. And yes, I would be surprised if culture plays any significant part in someones preference as personality traits seem prominent at an early age before children even understand what Homosexuality even is. Although as all sexuality types share the same culture, why we are not all raging homosexuals should be the significant red flag that believing such nonsense is baseless anyway.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

I see you skip over the question of mutual culture and genetics with polar sexual orientation when you quote.

I didn't comment because you make so little sense. I don't even know what you are trying to argue other than floating the idea that everything is random for which you by the way have no evidence either. You also went from "it's not genetic, as it's not hereditary", which is a wrong conclusion even if we leave aside the current evidence in favour of it being heritable, to "it's a mental process so I'm not surprised that there are genetic similarities" which sounds as incoherent as your overall position.

Whether you personally exclude the possibility of culture being the basis of Homosexuality or not, your evidence doesn't support this.

Before I'll explain why I think culture could well be important, it's time that you live up to your own standards and provide some evidence for your position.

So any conclusion you reach is subjective and highly questionable - especially from an anti progressive activist. And yes, I would be surprised if culture plays any significant part in someones preference as personality traits seem prominent at an early age before children even understand what Homosexuality even is.

Please define first what you mean by homosexuality and then provide evidence that it is "prominent at an early age before children even understand what it is".

Although as all sexuality types share the same culture, why we are not all raging homosexuals should be the significant red flag that believing such nonsense is baseless anyway.

This statement shows that you don't understand my argument.

[B0ycey]

As my standards for myself are only opinions I don't need to provide evidence Kaiser. They are observations and personal conclusions. But I am not the one who is providing evidence with contractional statements that don't align with the evidence provided. You are. If you want to declare that it is your opinion that culture is a factor in sexual orientation (and adhere to my standards), you don't need to provide evidence for your assertion either. But please don't do a One Degree and say this opinion is "Common Knowledge".

Oh and by the way, lets not forget where this argument stems from. A comment from myself that it is possible that there is no scientific truth. This remains true unless you can disprove randomness FYI.

[One Degree]

@B0ycey
If you don’t want to be told something is common knowledge then don’t ask people to waste their time providing evidence of things that are common knowledge. It is commonly accepted some/most (if not all) homosexuality behavior is psychological. There should be no need to provide proof for something everyone should be aware of. Whether it is true or not is a separate question.

@B0ycey wouldn’t ‘randomness’ be a scientific explanation?

[B0ycey]

You also went from "it's not genetic, as it's not hereditary", which is a wrong conclusion even if we leave aside the current evidence in favour of it being heritable, to "it's a mental process so I'm not surprised that there are genetic similarities" which sounds as incoherent as your overall position.

Also this. You are aware that as neurons are nerves cells the way they process information is not dependent on DNA right? Hence why twins are not drones and have independent thought. If this is true then again it implies randomness if the conditions are the same. I don't know how much clearer I can make my opinion!

[B0ycey]

@B0ycey
If you don’t want to be told something is common knowledge then don’t ask people to waste their time providing evidence of things that are common knowledge. It is commonly accepted some/most (if not all) homosexuality behavior is psychological. There should be no need to provide proof for something everyone should be aware of. Whether it is true or not is a separate question.

Firstly, I am not asking Kaiser for anything. She responded to me, not the other way round. Secondly, knowledge is not the same as opinion. And that is what I am getting from you. So it is not common knowledge that is culture and even less so when she provides evidence of a genetic link anyway.

#teachermyarse