Support NeoGAF

[gerg]

No. BTW, I'm just throwing an idea in the air here.

What I'm saying is that your personality, your hobbies, interests etc may be determined by your childhood. As in, your body language is actually your parents' that you've subconsciously embraced as your own, your hobbies and interests are determined by the first toys you got, or by observing what your parents were doing, your personnality and attitude towards the world is determined by your first friends, your first teachers, other family..

How does this cycle start?

How can straight parents produce gay children?

Would it be impossible for sexuality to be the same way? Influenced by exterior stimuli?
Retarded example: Child is raised in a town where there's 90% men and 10% women, and all women are ugly. Child might have more chances of being homosexual. Also, if he's raised by a homosexual couple, I could see the same thing happening.

If that were the case, why would children raised in the same environments show a different sexuality?

 

[Neoriceisgood]

Isn't it true that everyone has at least one gay experience in their lifetime?

I had some black guy on a bicycle offer me a blowjob once, does that count?

 

[HunkyDory]

I find it funny some non-gays think that being homosexual is a choice or has something to do with how you're being raised, but if you ask gay people they all say they were born with it and it wasn't a 'choice' and didn't have a fuck to do with how they were raised.

Just to play Devil's Advocate here - but this doesn't do anything to refute the idea that early socialisation plays a role in the development of sexual orientation.

Not least of all because these influences could have taken effect before the infant has a functional capacity for memory.

If you were to ask people whether the interactions that they shared with their primary care-givers before their third birthday had a significant influence on their adolescent and adult development, most would say no.

They'd most likely be wrong though.

 

[Giard]

I'll let someone else smarter and more patient than me deal with this, I'll just laugh to myself and hope you never get to make public policy.

I think you missed the whole "idea in the air" thing. Like, in the first sentence.
What I said is not my opinion. It is one among some behavior theories learned in psychology..
I was just wondering if that theory could be applicable to sexuality.

Don't see where the insults are needed here.

 

[Baraka in the White House]

Isn't it true that everyone has at least one gay experience in their lifetime?

Ron White sums it up nicely:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mY711HJK7pg

 

[DECK'ARD]

I think you missed the whole "idea in the air" thing. Like, in the first sentence.
What I said is not my opinion. It is one among some behavior theories learned in psychology..
I was just wondering if that theory could be applicable to sexuality.

Don't see where the insults are needed here.

Read my last post.

You are missing a lot of the pieces of the picture.

 

[I NEED SCISSORS]

I had some black guy on a bicycle offer me a blowjob once, does that count?

Well, did you accept?

But my point was, wouldn't that make the Pope a hypocrite?

 

[Joel Was Right]

I assume GAF has delivered another insightful discussion on theological doctrines and Biblical literature?

 

[Mael]

I watched Pokemon. Pokemon is pretty big on the male-female attraction thing you know. Every episode has Brock chasing some chick.

Oh I was being facetious, it comes from a friend's joke that claim that he was being big on women because he watched so much City Hunter as a toddler (let's all hail AB prod for our childhood memories :lol ) and he was lamenting on the tv shows at the time saying that children raised with pokemon would be onto their dogs or something.
The whole notion seemed totally hilarious at the time (and still make me chuckle) because it is so preposterous.

guess it shows how much I follow the whole pokemon shows :lol
still pkmn is an order of magnitude tamer than City Hunter (in comparison it even borders on the zoophilia side of things, that's how fucking extreme CH is)

 

[SmokyDave]

I assume GAF has delivered another insightful discussion on theological doctrines and Biblical literature?

Nah, we're just discussing some dopey old man and his outdated world view.

 

[Mau ®]

Is the pope shooting for irrelevancy?

 

[HunkyDory]

No. BTW, I'm just throwing an idea in the air here.

What I'm saying is that your personality, your hobbies, interests etc may be determined by your childhood. As in, your body language is actually your parents' that you've subconsciously embraced as your own, your hobbies and interests are determined by the first toys you got, or by observing what your parents were doing, your personnality and attitude towards the world is determined by your first friends, your first teachers, other family..

There's a guy in psychology (can't remember the name) who claimed that he could get any baby to do whatever job he would like to. For example, he would claim that this baby will become a fireman when he's older.

Would it be impossible for sexuality to be the same way? Influenced by exterior stimuli?
Retarded example: Child is raised in a town where there's 90% men and 10% women, and all women are ugly. Child might have more chances of being homosexual. Also, if he's raised by a homosexual couple, I could see the same thing happening.

Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I’ll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select -- doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief and, yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors.

That guy?

Watson was a radical behaviourist who believed that infants were born blank slates - or rather, shapeless blobs of clay that would then be sculpted by their environment.

This for of radical behaviourism is dead in the water... although I have always loved that quote.

That's not to say that there can't be a role for psycho-social factors to influence sexual development, but it will inevitably take a role that the behaviourists were unwilling to discuss.

 

[siddx]

boo this man and everything he represents.

 

[Giard]

How does this cycle start?
How can straight parents produce gay children?

Cycle? I guess when the baby is born.

It's not only the parents who have an impact on the kid, but everything around him. It could be the TV shows he watched + friends + ....

If that were the case, why would children raised in the same environments show a different sexuality?

I would have a hard time believing a child would be raised in the EXACT same environment, as an example: Even twins, the most probable way, would have different toys, may have different friends, gone to different schools or have different teachers that would influence their way of seeing life.

Read my last post.

You are missing a lot of the pieces of the picture.

I never claimed to be a reference in what I'm saying though :lol
I read it, replied this on the previous page:

Isn't the body still growing during childhood? Couldn't it be possible that this happens during that time?

Your explanation makes a lot of sense though, where did you learn that? I'm only emitting a theory.

useless knowledge: I have even ring and index fingers, I'm straight, but I have womanly hands

BTW, sorry if I'm being offensive in any way, may it be to homosexuals or otherwise.

That guy?

Watson was a radical behaviourist who believed that infants were born blank slates - or rather, shapeless blobs of clay that would then be sculpted by their environment.

This for of radical behaviourism is dead in the water... although I have always loved that quote.

That's not to say that there can't be a role for psycho-social factors to influence sexual development, but it will inevitably take a role that the behaviourists were unwilling to discuss.

Thanks! That's exactly the guy I was talking about. I agree with you on the last point, just want to see if there's a role.

 

[SouthernDragon]

I know it's been said but

Why not shut the fuck up until you take care of the pedophiles in your church?

P.S.

I have not had, nor intend to, have a gay experience, thanks.

 

[selig]

Gay people don't have a problem with the church because they can't marry in the church. I don't think (m)any give a flying f- about that.

They've a problem when leadership in a big group - any such group - starts preaching bullshit and bile about gay people and homosexuality. It can have lots of knock-on effects in lots of ways.

Well, so basically they´re complaining about people being stupid.

We´ll have to wait for the current leading generation to die, so once our generation is leading the world, things will have changed. That´s just nothing you can achieve by complaining about it.

And still, I think it´s totally right of the catholic church to be against homosexuals. It´s just too essential for their beliefs. The problem is that so many people follow this dated religion. But wanting the church to say "yay, homosexuals ftw!" is stupid. It´s like telling NAMBLA "go out and tell everybody that sex with children is wrong!". These institutions suck, they are dumb, they are, at least to many people, wrong. But if you want them to say and admit stuff the goes against their inherent beliefs, you will not achieve a thing. Ignoring them and talking to people is the best you can do.

 

[X26]

hopefully this acts to keep church attendance decreasing

 

[Dan Yo]

The only thing that puzzles me is to this day I don't think they've found the DNA code that is homosexuality. Don't get me wrong I think homosexuals are born that way. Hell facebook proves it. Any kid I even remotely suspected being gay in middle school / high school turned out to be gay. I just don't understand why they can't find the gene that causes it. Unless my knowledge is dated and they have in fact found it.

Why do you prefer anything? Is your favorite color green because you have the green gene? No. Because some experience you had caused you to like green.

Some people prefer to have sexual relations with animals. They might tell you that they've been this way for as long as they can remember and never consciously chose bestiality as their sexual preference, so it must be natural, but that doesn't really mean they were born that way.

Regardless, homosexuality doesn't lean on the gay gene to justify itself.

 

[DECK'ARD]

Isn't the body still growing during childhood? Couldn't it be possible that this happens during that time?

Your explanation makes a lot of sense though, where did you learn that? I'm only emitting a theory.

useless knowledge: I have even ring and index fingers, I'm straight, but I have womanly hands :lol

The body is still growing, but the body's production of hormone levels is set early on at some point. Probably due to the ratio in the womb of the mother between oestrogen and testosterone.

When someone is underdoing a sex change, say from female to male, they artificially raise the levels of testosterone above the person's natural level. This produces many physical changes in line with that person becoming a man, it does not however change the sex that person is attracted to.

The region of the brain that controls sexual attraction is probably set very early, in the same way as the sex of the brain itself is set very early.

The horrible word 'Gaydar' is the picking up of physical and mannerism cues that relate to feminine characteristics in a man and masculine characteristics in a female. Such things as facial structure, pitch of voice, some gay men have more feminine characteristics. Studies of the brain activity of gay men have shown some have more in common with women. That is oestrogen at work. Some lesbians have more manly features, that is testosterone at work. This isn't the case for all, but there is an overlap.

The womb is just a melting pot of the sex hormones, and sexuality is one of the outcomes of that.

And that is nothing to do with how you are raised, or if your bedroom was pink versus blue.

 

[Mael]

Well, so basically they´re complaining about people being stupid.

We´ll have to wait for the current leading generation to die, so once our generation is leading the world, things will have changed. That´s just nothing you can achieve by complaining about it.

And still, I think it´s totally right of the catholic church to be against homosexuals. It´s just too essential for their beliefs. The problem is that so many people follow this dated religion. But wanting the church to say "yay, homosexuals ftw!" is stupid. It´s like telling NAMBLA "go out and tell everybody that sex with children is wrong!". These institutions suck, they are dumb, they are, at least to many people, wrong. But if you want them to say and admit stuff the goes against their inherent beliefs, you will not achieve a thing. Ignoring them and talking to people is the best you can do.

:lol :lol :lol so now the church being anti-gay is the same as NAMBLA wanting to fondle children?

 

[Blutonium]

"In December a leading Roman Catholic cardinal reinforced the message, saying that homosexuality was an "insult to God" and that homosexuals and transsexuals will never go to heaven"

Sooo...what if you're born as an intersexual?

 

[krypt0nian]

Bronze Age peddling, AIDS enabling, pedo protecting filth.

.

 

[Hitokage]

Again, just because Paul hated gay people doesn't mean strict heterosexuality is a fundamental christian belief.

 

[AlteredBeast]

Honestly? Probably around 9 or 10? Before that I wouldn't touch a girl, they were revolting. I preferred to hang around guys. The only girl I accepted as being cool was my sister.

The media, family, friends and even video games presented boys being attracted to girls and so I followed suit and here I am today, oggling over females I find attractive.

I never got that whole cooties thing. A neighborhood girl and I were rolling around kissing when we were like 4 years old.

I was always flirting with girls from preschool on up. Honestly, I never got that whole cooties/gross thing about girls. They were always attractive to me.

 

[Souldriver]

That brings back memories.



I remember the day I decided to be gay like it was yesterday. I woke up one morning and in a moment of confusion and spontaneity I thought to myself: I hate being so damn regular, go so unnoticed. What if I go gay from now on..? That'll get me some attention! I got out of the door and started focusing on the crotch area from every male passer byer, imagining their penises being pressed against their abdomen and wedged into weird positions because of their underwear and belts. It didn't really do anything at first, but after a while the "yuck" feeling started to subside. When I got home I immediately downloaded some gay porn, and I was surprised by how stimulating it was to see. At first I felt kind of uncomfortable, but before I knew it the gag reflex was gone (which has multiple plus sides), and I was thoroughly jerking off to the sight of 2 guys double penetrating the anus of third guy.



I'm completely enjoying my gay life style now, and I take the occasional anti-gay remark as a little side effect.

Anyone else want to share their experience with deciding whether to go straight or gay?

 

[gofreak]

Well, so basically they´re complaining about people being stupid.

Those that abuse the ignorance of others and their unquestioning faith, or others via the influence they have over people.

That´s just nothing you can achieve by complaining about it.

Sure there is. There's nothing wrong with standing up for yourself. You're suggesting people just roll over when they're bullied.

And still, I think it´s totally right of the catholic church to be against homosexuals. It´s just too essential for their beliefs. The problem is that so many people follow this dated religion. But wanting the church to say "yay, homosexuals ftw!" is stupid.

I want them to take their big noses out of the business of others. The church has moved to block gay equality IN CIVIL TERMS wherever it has influence. I couldn't give a shit for gay inequality inside a church. I want them to STOP campaigning against gay equality outside their boundaries. If they don't do that, they'll have to accept people campaigning against them in the loudest possible terms.

It's cute to think one day we could just let the church ramble on to itself in the corner while we chuckle about their ignorance, but the church is not some inert entity. It holds real sway in some parts of the world that it is exercising to hurt people in very material ways.

PS: their belief isn't 'right'. A belief isn't inherently right because it is a religious one. It's perfectly possible to hold all manner of beliefs that others would say you're wrong to hold. You're not somehow entitled to respect for any old belief you hold, or entitled to be considered 'right' for them by the mere fact of possessing those beliefs. Are racists right to believe people of other races are inferior? Etc. etc. etc.

 

[gerg]

I would have a hard time believing a child would be raised in the EXACT same environment, as an example: Even twins, the most probable way, would have different toys, may have different friends, gone to different schools or have different teachers that would influence their way of seeing life.

But why would the twins want different toys, and make different friends? Once one child likes to play with certain toys (and the other with different toys), I'm sure many parents will pander to these tastes. But how does this difference in behaviour start? Are you really going to insinuate that playing with the red Power Ranger makes a big difference from playing with the black Power Ranger?

How does the feedback cycle start?

 

[FauX]

The pope is right, sorry.

1 corinth 6:9,10

 

[xelios]

:lol :lol :lol so now the church being anti-gay is the same as NAMBLA wanting to fondle children?

Dunno, but the church fondling children on the other hand...

Too obvious?

 

[Giard]

The body is still growing, but the body's production of hormone levels is set early on at some point. Probably due to the ratio in the womb of the mother between oestrogen and testosterone.

When someone is underdoing a sex change, say from female to male, they artificially raise the levels of testosterone above the person's natural level. This produces many physical changes in line with that person becoming a man, it does not however change the sex that person is attracted to.

The region of the brain that controls sexual attraction is probably set very early, in the same way as the sex of the brain itself is set very early.

The horrible word 'Gaydar' is the picking up of physical and mannerism cues that relate to feminine characteristics in a man and masculine characteristics in a female. Such things as facial structure, pitch of voice, some gay men have more feminine characteristics. Studies of the brain activity of gay men have shown some have more in common with women. That is oestrogen at work. Some lesbians have more manly features, that is testosterone at work. This isn't the case for all, but there is an overlap.

The womb is just a melting pot of the sex hormones, and sexuality is one of the outcomes of that.

And that is nothing to do with how you are raised, or if your bedroom was pink versus blue.

Thanks for explaining that without calling me a retard. :lol
How about asexuality? Would it be determined in the womb?

 

[kame-sennin]

This takes it beyond homophobia into blatant sexism.

..but what else do you expect from an organization that claims to be founded by Paul, the biblical Steve Jobs to Steve "Jesus" Wozniak.

Homophobia, particularly Christian homophobia, is rooted in sexism. The reason why homosexual marriage is so strongly opposed is that - as the pope alluded to - it reduces the importance of gender roles in society. For example, if two men are married, who "minds the house"? If two women are married, who is the "bread winner"? These questions might seem irrelevant to rational modern people, but those ideas are exactly the kind that conservative Christians (Catholics or otherwise) consider vital to a functioning society. Further, by raising and providing alternative answers to these questions, homosexual relationships provide a "corrupting" example for heterosexual couples. If a woman in a Lesbian couple can work outside the house and pay the bills, why can't a woman in a heterosexual relationship do the same? The sexist traditions of Christianity are a house of cards that immediately come tumbling down once members of the flock are introduced to alternative ideas. Women can not be subjected by men if they know that there are other ways of living a satisfying life. That's why most Christian groups despise feminists as much as they despise homosexuals. They are both subversive influences that threaten to unseat men from their role of dominance over women in conservative Christian ideology.

 

[Hitokage]

The pope is right, sorry.

1 corinth 6:9,10

Paul was wrong, sorry.

 

[JumpJeff84]

Choosing sexuality? Yeah right Pope, I wish. If I could, I'd choose to be gay. It'd make my life a whole hell of a lot easier if I was into dudes, but I'm not. I even let some guy blow me once when I was 19, just to see. No dice though, I'm just not gay.

 

[FauX]

Paul was wrong, sorry.

and you are right, uh?

No thanks, I rather believe in Paul

 

[Giard]

But why would the twins want different toys, and make different friends. Once one child likes to play with certain toys (and the other with different toys), I'm sure many parents will pander to these tastes. But how does this difference in behaviour start? Are you really going to insinuate that playing with the red Power Ranger makes a big difference from playing with the black Power Ranger?

How does the feedback cycle start?

To go with that theory again,
Well maybe not red/black Power Ranger :lol , but I can see twins being raised differently if one played with a football all the time, and the other was on the NES. If you're asking WHY one took the football and the other the NES....I dunno. You could explain it by going really far back with exterior stimuli, but it would take too long and probably be plain untrue. I guess this is why the theory is now ignored by most like HunkyDory said.

 

[Mael]

I want them to take their big noses out of the business of others. The church has moved to block gay equality IN CIVIL TERMS wherever it has influence. I couldn't give a shit for gay inequality inside a church. I want them to STOP campaigning against gay equality outside their boundaries. If they don't do that, they'll have to accept people campaigning against them in the loudest possible terms.

It's cute to think one day we could just let the church ramble on to itself in the corner while we chuckle about their ignorance, but the church is not some inert entity. It holds real sway in some parts of the world that it is exercising to hurt people in very material ways.

I swear the way you people talk about it, you'd lead people to believe that EVERY SINGLE priest would excommuniate people at the mere signs of gayness from someone in their church :lol
I swear some of you have a bigger problem than you let on, then again I come from a country where they couldn't do anything against anyone homosexual or else
Like that other topic where people were indignant that gay people couldn't put their children in their schools, I swear some would have wanted that the gay couple to have a marriage in the church by how they were reacting :lol

 

[gofreak]

and you are right, uh?

No thanks, I rather believe in Paul

I'd trust the opinions of people thousands of years ago regarding human sexuality and human nature as much as I'd trust them in front of the wheel of a car.

The bible is in many ways a testament to human knowledge - and human ignorance - at the time of its writing. Paul is little exception.

 

[DECK'ARD]

Thanks for explaining that without calling me a retard. :lol
How about asexuality? Would it be determined in the womb?

Nearly everything in nature is equal and opposites, 2 things working against each other. But those 2 things can produce a myriad of outcomes in between.

Very few things are pure one or the other.

There is no such thing as a pure man, or a pure woman, everyone is a ratio of testosterone versus oestrogen. And being the sex hormones, sexuality is most likely a similar scale of one through to the other. Straight through bisexual to gay, but those labels are too simplistic. It's the labels that scare people, and labels are a useful way of condemning others and isolating them as different.

Asexuality is probably more connected with the chemicals that affect sex-drive, such as dopamine.

When people realise we are all just a biological mix of all sorts of things, and that the variety is a good thing not a bad thing, then the world would be a better place.

 

[Furoba]

If he didn't wear a red robe, he'd be sued for discrimination and hate speech right?

 

[FauX]

I'd trust the opinions of people thousands of years ago regarding human sexuality and human nature as much as I'd trust them in front of the wheel of a car.

The bible is in many ways a testament to human knowledge - and human ignorance - at the time of its writing. Paul is little exception.

Would you please explain the bolded sentence? I'm kinda interested in knowing why.

 

[effzee]

Completely off topic question but thought I might ask here since people might know Christian history.

What is the significance of the name "Fatima" in Christianity? I see it a lot used in relation to Catholic schools and religious references.

I am curious cause a Muslim the name is very common to hear for us since it was the daughter of Muhammed. Never learned about a figure in Christianity named Fatima.

 

[gofreak]

I swear the way you people talk about it, you'd lead people to believe that EVERY SINGLE priest would excommuniate people at the mere signs of gayness from someone in their church :lol
I swear some of you have a bigger problem than you let on, then again I come from a country where they couldn't do anything against anyone homosexual or else

Well gee, maybe that's why you're not so concerned.

Look at what happened to Italy's gay partnership proposals once the vatican spoke. Look at what the pope is saying now in Portugal as it prepares its own legislation. Then turn around and tell me that what I say about church influence and interference is not true

 

[SmokyDave]

The pope is right, sorry.

1 corinth 6:9,10

Is that this one...

“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived, neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves . . . shall inherit the kingdom of God.”

Because if so I don't think anybody will be inheriting that kingdom. Fornicators? 'The unrighteous'? That net is so wide I'm fairly certain Roland Ratzinger ain't going to slip it.

 

[JDSN]

So child molesting doesnt make mean you are gay?

 

[Hari Seldon]

Paul was wrong, sorry.

You have to look at it from the perspective of Paul. His perspective of homosexuality was from what he saw of the Romans, who used boy sex slaves and all that shit. It wasn't from a modern perspective, which is why the church's views need updating.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Sure would be nice if he was strong against homosexual child molesters.

 

[Dan Yo]

Choosing sexuality? Yeah right Pope, I wish. If I could, I'd choose to be gay. It'd make my life a whole hell of a lot easier if I was into dudes, but I'm not. I even let some guy blow me once when I was 19, just to see. No dice though, I'm just not gay.

Whenever you hear about the Catholic church being against homosexuality, it is the act they are against, not the tendency.

 

[Schmitty]

I'm a Catholic, along with most of my friends. We've learned to just kind of ignore the Vatican

 

["God's Beard!"]

Little Timmy, I'm coming for you man. My style is impetuous. My defense is impregnable, and I'm just ferocious. I want your heart. I want to lick children. Praise be to God!
-"Eggs" Benedict

 

[i_am_ben]

looks like FauX is making quite the Faux pas.


...


... sorry I've been reading foucauldian perspectives on accounting all day and my brain is fried