There is absolutely NO WAY there are this many people born truly gay!!!

[WildCh1ld]

[BigLittleTim]

Of course, all gay men are limp-wristed, lisping, weaklings...
except for the ones who aren't.

THAT's the part that's got ya' all scared, isn't it! Isn't it so reasuring when they act like Gene Simmons, or Jack on Will & Grace? Ya' can spot 'em a mile away, eh?

I know lots of muscle-bound, he-man types who ARE in the military (or are cops or firemen), who DIDN'T play with dolls or dress up in Mom's clothes, WHO do not have public sex, who BENCH and SQUAT more weight than you can, are objects of lust and envy to every woman or man who sees them, and they are GAY! GAY! GAY!

Your selfish arguments are tiresome. It actually hurts my brain to read this thread.

No matter what you "believe", can you not recognize hypocricy when you allow yourself every sexual freedom (read your own damned posts) which Ma & Pa Middle-America would condemn as "not normal", yet you want an entire population to live sexless, lonely, isolated lives so that you won't have to think of what disgusting things they are, when you think of them, IF you think of them, which won't be all that often as you're too busy F***ing and Whoring your own brains out.

[BG]

I have no problem w/gay men, but lately I've been hit on by quite a few, and I have to say that shit does piss me off.

Especially when I am with my wife and son. Next time, I'm breakin' jaws. On the Net too, it's just too much at times, and it's a feeling that is, well, f*cking disgusting.

I'l have to make shirts and avatars that read "PUSSY LOVER".

~SC~

[MilitiaGuy]

Of course, all gay men are limp-wristed, lisping, weaklings...
except for the ones who aren't.

THAT's the part that's got ya' all scared, isn't it! Isn't it so reasuring when they act like Gene Simmons, or Jack on Will & Grace? Ya' can spot 'em a mile away, eh?

I know lots of muscle-bound, he-man types who ARE in the military (or are cops or firemen), who DIDN'T play with dolls or dress up in Mom's clothes, WHO do not have public sex, who BENCH and SQUAT more weight than you can, are objects of lust and envy to every woman or man who sees them, and they are GAY! GAY! GAY!

Your selfish arguments are tiresome. It actually hurts my brain to read this thread.

No matter what you "believe", can you not recognize hypocricy when you allow yourself every sexual freedom (read your own damned posts) which Ma & Pa Middle-America would condemn as "not normal", yet you want an entire population to live sexless, lonely, isolated lives so that you won't have to think of what disgusting things they are, when you think of them, IF you think of them, which won't be all that often as you're too busy F***ing and Whoring your own brains out.

[mark956101957]

If a gay man hits on SC while in the gym and has no idea if he is gay than what right does he have to make such an attempt. I would say more than likely everyone can look at him and his mannerisms and say this man is straight but than a gay man still hits on him. I pity that gay man first for being so stupid and secondly he could be in for an ass kicking and deservedly so. Wheres the respect, the gays want respect than they should respect our heterosexuality!

[punchrf]

one of my friends from my last gym was gay. i didn't know it for about 8 months till my buddy told me. he didn't try to hit on me so i have no problems with him. maybe i'm losing my sex appeal already.

[WildCh1ld]

If a gay man hits on SC while in the gym and has no idea if he is gay than what right does he have to make such an attempt. I would say more than likely everyone can look at him and his mannerisms and say this man is straight but than a gay man still hits on him. I pity that gay man first for being so stupid and secondly he could be in for an ass kicking and deservedly so. Wheres the respect, the gays want respect than they should respect our heterosexuality!

AMEN BRUTHA!!!

[Slick Arrado]

Dumbest argument ever. Cannibalism, incest, etc are all common among animals. What now? If you were to read and study history..........only now is homosexuality accepted throughout the world, for the simple fact that morality has declined (you will also see the decline in morality if you study history). Go far enough back and you would have been killed for being a homo.

How far back is one supposed to go? I'm not taking a stance, either way, in this thread but didn't the Roman army have a system where a "veteran" would take a young male under his wing as a soldier trainee and lover?

[decadbal]

the romans openly practiced homosexuiality.. indians, and almost every other culture had it in one form or another.. and it wasnt looked down upon... its only looked down upon by bigots and undereducated morons.

[SwoleCat]

If a gay man hits on SC while in the gym and has no idea if he is gay than what right does he have to make such an attempt. I would say more than likely everyone can look at him and his mannerisms and say this man is straight but than a gay man still hits on him. I pity that gay man first for being so stupid and secondly he could be in for an ass kicking and deservedly so. Wheres the respect, the gays want respect than they should respect our heterosexuality!

What's worse is when I am w/my woman and son, and some flamer at 1000 degrees in undressing me w/his eyes up and down in the middle of a grocery store.

Gonna end up catchin' a jar of pickles over the head if I'm in the wrong mood that day.

I mean, some people may not like my stance or the way I look at it, but oh well...........it's my life and my choice, and I've always spoken my mind regardless of the situation.
~SC~

[FCECC2]

the romans openly practiced homosexuiality.. indians, and almost every other culture had it in one form or another.. and it wasnt looked down upon... its only looked down upon by bigots and undereducated morons.

wooaaa im really surprise by this unexpected reply of deca !!

[abstrack]

Lets keep this thread civil or well just close it. I am tired by now of the remarks such as "I cant understand why a man would like a big hairy ass"

Who cares! No one is asking you to understand it. Move on and lets talk about BB'ing or something else.

This thread is going no where

[Tock]

I was 16 working at TCBY in the Galleria mall in Dallas,TX....

I left work one day and a guy came up to me and started asking me how I was doing, where was I going, etc (you could tell he was gay by his voice)............I replied that I was doing well and bid him good day........He replied "dont you remember me? I got a sundae from you today" I said "Sorry bro I dont remember ya I serve alot of sundaes"...........He replied that the sundae had nuts on it and how he love sucking on nuts..........I said "hope you enjoyed it and have a good day" and began to walk away...............He then grabbed my a$$ and said "dont leave your cute".......I turned around and clocked him square in the nose..........then stood over him screaming for him and his gay friends to stay away from me and my store......about that time mall security tackled me and it turned into a big mess after that.......

My point is ever since then I've been more apprehensive towards the gay community and public display of affection

Well, IMHO, you were within your rights once that guy groped you.
But, keep in mind that plenty of women get groped by abusive men, yet they don't get "apprehensive towards heterosexuals or public displays of affection."
Think about it . . . one gay idiot stepped over the line. You punched him out, which is what he had coming. But 99.999% of gay men wouldn't do that sort of thing. So, you're letting that one smarmy lecherous idiot taint your opinion about lots of other people. If that's what you want to do, well, fine. But, IMHO, I think you're smarter than that.

-Tock

[Tock]

How far back is one supposed to go? I'm not taking a stance, either way, in this thread but didn't the Roman army have a system where a "veteran" would take a young male under his wing as a soldier trainee and lover?

That would be Sparta, in ancient Greece.
They would pair off a 15 year old with a 25 year old veteran who would be his mentor for the next ten years. They'd train together, fight wars together, eat, drink, sleep, and have sex together. They would have to go off and screw a woman from time to time, just to keep the population going, but pretty much, guys much preferred male company and sex.
http://ancienthistory.about.com/libr...attle+athletes
Life as a Spartan Similar was one of privilege, but not of ease. At birth, a young Spartan male was brought before a board of elders and examined for physical deformities. If he was not up to standard, he was carried to a nearby gorge, where he was left to die of exposure. At age seven, a boy who had survived his initial review was taken from his mother to begin his formal education in discipline and obedience, a training that would effectively last the rest of his life. Young Spartans were divided among "herds" of youths in an educational regime that resembled a Boy Scout troop in hell. Each herd was run by the older boys, who were mandated to whip (literally, in the case of certain endurance rituals) the younger ones into shape. In effect, the Spartan kindergarten was run by the toughest kids from junior high, and these were in turn urged on to new levels of toughness by stern elders, men who had suffered the same upbringing.

Young men undergoing training were isolated from the rest of society; it is perhaps not surprising that homosexual relations between boys and young men were regarded as standard. Indeed it was a mark of shame for a boy not to be courted by an older youth. The Spartans believed that homosexual relations between young men encouraged unit solidarity and battlefield valor, reasoning that a lover would surely not shame himself before his beloved by flinching back from the line.

[mark956101957]

[QUOTE=Tock]Well, IMHO, you were within your rights once that guy groped you.
But, keep in mind that plenty of women get groped by abusive men, yet they don't get "apprehensive towards heterosexuals or public displays of affection."
Think about it . . . one gay idiot stepped over the line. You punched him out, which is what he had coming. But 99.999% of gay men wouldn't do that sort of thing. So, you're letting that one smarmy lecherous idiot taint your opinion about lots of other people. If that's what you want to do, well, fine. But, IMHO, I think you're smarter than that.

You don't think women become apprehensive when they have been groped by men?(heterosexuals) Think again, it can change their whole attitude toward men, relationships with men in general and their behavior for a long time psychologically. Especially since they are not apt to have the ability to turn around and punch the guy out.

[Tock]

. . . morality has declined (you will also see the decline in morality if you study history). Go far enough back and you would have been killed for being a homo.

So . . . are you saying that years ago, when people were more "moral," it was a virtuous act to kill people for being gay?
-Tock

[Tock]

Originally Posted by Tock

Well, homosexuality is found in lots of other animal species in similar proportion as it is found amongst humans, so while it may not be "typical," it is "normal."
Sort of like bodybuilders. They aren't typical, but are still "normal."
-Tock

it's actually NOT really gay to animals.. ..

Sure it is.
We've covered this topic pretty well in another thread, so I'm not going to spend much time on it here, but this website
http://myweb.lsbu.ac.uk/~stafflag/zoology.html
can provide information that will "set you straight," so to speak . . .

Bruce Bagemihl, (1999), "Biological Exuberance - Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity", Profile Books, 752 pages, ISBN 1861971826 (hardcover).

Biologist proves animals are just as queer as folk by Steve Farrar in The Sunday Times, 6th. June, 1999, page 12. "A detailed survey of sexual behaviour in the animal kingdom has shown that homosexuality is as natural as heterosexuality. Over 300 species of mammal and bird have been shown to exhibit a range of homosexual behaviour."
"Dr Bruce Bagemihl, a biologist in Seattle, America, who spent 10 years compiling the study, believes this behaviour is firm evidence that not all animal sexual activity revolves around procreation. 'Animal homosexuality is a rich and multifaceted phenomenon that is at least as complex and varied as heterosexuality - the lives of 'queer' animals are far more diverse than we could ever have imagined,' he said."

"Bagemihl has gained his insights from research into extensive zoological studies dating back two centuries. These record an enormous variety of behaviour patterns, including bisexual activities as well as some that are exclusively homosexual."

"Some animals seem particularly predisposed towards homosexuality.

Most male bottlenose dolphins pair off with other males during their youth, yet will never bond with a female, even after mating.

Male humboldt penguins can form lifelong homosexual relationships and will remain exclusively with their partner until one of them dies - in zoo populations at least one in 20 of all pairs of the bird are homosexual. Among king penguins, some birds show a preference for same-sex mates even when unpaired birds of the opposite sex are available.

The bonobe or pigmy chimpanzee is generally promiscous with partners of either sex - homosexual activity accounts for almost half of all sexual acts.

Female grizzly bears will sometimes bond with each other and raise their young as a family group, though no sexual behaviour has been recorded.

In captivity, some elephants of both sexes engage in homosexual activity, using their trunks to touch each other."

"Among the many British species with homosexual tendencies are red and grey squirrels, badgers, grey seals, red deer, mute swans and mallard ducks. Courting displays by garden birds such as sparrows, starlings, crows, magpies and blackbirds are also often targeted at same-sex partners."

"Bagemihl's research challenges the theory that homosexuality might be a natural way to reduce population size when a species becomes too numerous for its environment. Even in a species of bird such as the black stilt, of which fewer than 100 pairs are left in the wild, there are still female homosexual couples. He does not believe they pose any particular threat to the population's survival."

"Bagemihl discovered evidence of homosexuality among many other types of animal. These include lizards, tortoises, frogs, snakes, fish, beetles, dragonflies, butterflies, spiders and bees."

"Gay people have spent years opposing the argument that homosexuality is unnatural but Bagemihl's revelations will amuse rather than reassure them, according to Alan Sinfield, professor of English at Sussex University and an expert in cultural attitudes towards homosexuals. Sinfield said: 'They have tended to side-step the notion and say it doesn't matter what animals do - we're a more advanced species'."

[MilitiaGuy]

homosexuality is bad and perv thats it and now close the thread , end of discussion.

[MilitiaGuy]

If a gay man hits on SC while in the gym and has no idea if he is gay than what right does he have to make such an attempt. I would say more than likely everyone can look at him and his mannerisms and say this man is straight...

swolecat<----- ----->you

[RA]

That would be Sparta, in ancient Greece.
They would pair off a 15 year old with a 25 year old veteran who would be his mentor for the next ten years. They'd train together, fight wars together, eat, drink, sleep, and have sex together. They would have to go off and screw a woman from time to time, just to keep the population going, but pretty much, guys much preferred male company and sex.
http://ancienthistory.about.com/libr...attle+athletes
Life as a Spartan Similar was one of privilege, but not of ease. At birth, a young Spartan male was brought before a board of elders and examined for physical deformities. If he was not up to standard, he was carried to a nearby gorge, where he was left to die of exposure. At age seven, a boy who had survived his initial review was taken from his mother to begin his formal education in discipline and obedience, a training that would effectively last the rest of his life. Young Spartans were divided among "herds" of youths in an educational regime that resembled a Boy Scout troop in hell. Each herd was run by the older boys, who were mandated to whip (literally, in the case of certain endurance rituals) the younger ones into shape. In effect, the Spartan kindergarten was run by the toughest kids from junior high, and these were in turn urged on to new levels of toughness by stern elders, men who had suffered the same upbringing.

Young men undergoing training were isolated from the rest of society; it is perhaps not surprising that homosexual relations between boys and young men were regarded as standard. Indeed it was a mark of shame for a boy not to be courted by an older youth. The Spartans believed that homosexual relations between young men encouraged unit solidarity and battlefield valor, reasoning that a lover would surely not shame himself before his beloved by flinching back from the line.

Sorry Tock, tmi...

[colossus1]

As far back as I can remember, he was different, playing with dolls, and such.

Talking to him, he says he always knew he was different, wanted to be a girl.

No. His behavior wasnt corrected and thus he was treated differently...........

[colossus1]

So . . . are you saying that years ago, when people were more "moral," it was a virtuous act to kill people for being gay?
-Tock

You dont want me to answer this do you?

[colossus1]

How far back is one supposed to go? I'm not taking a stance, either way, in this thread but didn't the Roman army have a system where a "veteran" would take a young male under his wing as a soldier trainee and lover?

Roman army...a single civilization. Wow........you searched deep. . If you havent noticed, homosexuality is pretty much accepted worldwide.....which is only the case in this era.

[colossus1]

the romans openly practiced homosexuiality.. indians, and almost every other culture had it in one form or another.. and it wasnt looked down upon... its only looked down upon by bigots and undereducated morons.

So you named a few cultures...........big deal. Homosexuality was NEVER widespread across the globe and accepted like it is today. Im neither a bigot or undereducated...........and believe me when i say, i dont like homosexuals.

[Bigen12]

No. His behavior wasnt corrected and thus he was treated differently...........

So you are saying that my parents should have forced him to act more in line with his gender, instead of the way he was naturally?

If so you are agreeing with me, in that, he was born gay.

[colossus1]

So you are saying that my parents should have forced him to act more in line with his gender, instead of the way he was naturally?

If so you are agreeing with me, in that, he was born gay.

Uh.......no. Im saying with the current environment, little children can get confused (as your brother did) due to the environment. EVERYTHING an infant learned is taugh or learned by someones example.....eating, writing, speach, morals, personality, etc. So why would sexual preff. be any different? And yes your parents should have corrected the wrong behavior before he grew up. I want studies.......give me proof that people are BORN gay. Its just retarded...

[colossus1]

Gays chose to be the way they are. Saying being "born" gay is just trying to shift the blame.



From brain researcher Simon LeVay (1996), in his book Queer Science, published by The MIT Press:

"Most gay men and lesbian women have their own opinions about why they are homosexual. Although there are exceptions, gay men in the United States today generally tend to claim that they were "born gay". Ninety percent of gay men surveyed by the Advocate in 1994 claimed to have been born gay, and only four percent believed that choice came into the equation at all. Lesbians surveyed by the Advocate gave somewhat more diverse reasons: about half of them believed they were born gay, 28 percent thought that environmental circumstances (generally early childhood experiences) had played some role, and 15 percent said that choice had something to do with their sexual orientation. Although there are significant differences between the attitudes of lesbians and gay men, it is clear that both groups are far more inclined to consider their sexual orientation a biological "given" than is the general population.
"Should one take these assertions seriously? Not entirely, of course. No one even remembers being born, let alone being born gay or straight. When a gay man, for example, says he was born gay, he generally means that he felt different from other boys at the earliest age he can remember. Sometimes the difference involved sexual feelings, but more commonly it involved some kind of gender-nonconformist or 'sex-atypical' traits--disliking rough-and-tumble play, for example--that were not explicitly sexual. These differences, which have been verified in a number of ways, suggest that sexual orientation is influenced by factors operating very early in life, but these factors could still consist of environmental forces such as parental treatment in the early postnatal period.[emphasis added]" (Page 6)
"Recent surveys in the United States have also come up with prevalence figures well below 10 percent. Most studies agree that about 2 percent of the population have had at least one homosexual experience in the previous few years. In a large survey conducted by the National Opinion Research Center in 1992, 2.8 percent of men and 1.4 percent of women identified as "homosexual" or "bisexual". Another 3.2 percent of men and 4.1 percent of women identified as "heterosexual" but acknowledged some degree of same-sex attraction. The highest percentages reported in recent random-sample studies come from a market-research firm, Yankelovich Partners, Inc., who stated that 5.7 percent of their respondents identified as 'gay/homosexual/lesbian'." (Page 62)
"They found that gays and lesbians were significantly more nonconformist than heterosexuals in the following gender-differentiated traits: (1) participation in rough-and-tumble play, competitive athletics, or aggression, (2) toy and activity preference, (3) imagined roles and careers (significant difference for men only), (4) cross-dressing, (5) preference for same- or opposite-sex playmates, (6) social reputation as "sissy" or "tomboy," and (7) gender identity." (Page 98)
"Thus the association between childhood gender nonconformity and adult homosexuality is well established, especially in men." (Page 98)
"Richard Green, who trained with Money, searched for factors that might predispose to gender nonconformity in children. In his 1974 book Sexual Identify Conflict in Children and Adults, Green explored these factors by means of extensive interviews with gender-nonconformist boys and their parents. Although he was cautious in attributing causality, Green named several factors that he believed were associated with femininity in boys: the failure of parents to discourage feminine behaviors, their active encouragement of feminine behaviors, their active discouragement of boyish behaviors, maternal overprotection, and so on. He explained to parents that they might have unwittingly caused or promoted their son's femininity, and that they stood the best chance of correcting the problem if they started to actively discourage it and encourage masculinity instead. In particular, the fathers should take a more active role in the boy's life. "You've got to get these mothers out of the way," Green told the parents of one seven-year-old. "Feminine kids don't need their mothers around." (Pages 99-100)
"Surveys of the actual sex behavior of lesbians and gay men have indicated that gay men have far more sex partners than do lesbians. Sometimes the reported differences have been extreme. In a study conducted in the San Francisco Bay area in the 1970s, for example, almost one-half of the white gay men and one-third of the black gay men claimed to have had at least five hundred different male sex partners, whereas most of the lesbians had had less than 10 female sex partners." (Page 159)
"...[T]he gay men scored higher--they achieved more uncommitted sex--than the straight men." (Page 160)
"Although homosexual behavior is very common in the animal world, it seems to be very uncommon that individual animals have a long-lasting predisposition to engage in such behavior to the exclusion of heterosexual activities. Thus, a homosexual orientation if one can speak of such a thing in animals, seems to be a rarity." (Page 207)

[colossus1]

THis is for all you gat tards who claim to be born gay. THE OWN SCIENTISTS WHO HAVE DONE THE STUDIES SAY THEY DIDNT PROVE THAT FACT!!




By A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D., MBA, MPH


In the world of the academy, homosexuality is an issue on which there is little genuine intellectual exchange these days. And it's this topic that FAIR has asked me to address. I should perhaps add to the introduction so that you can appreciate my perspective. You need to know that I am not much of an activist on this issue or any other issue. I direct a research organization, teach at the medical school, and manage to provide therapy for a unique population--men who are distressed by their unwanted homosexual attraction.

As I reflected on this patient population who I have treated for more than three decades, many of these men had religious backgrounds, although a substantial minority, perhaps as much as 40%, did not. For the single men who struggle with these unwanted attractions, the most frequent complaint was: "Gay relationships are not working for me. Would you help me explore my options?" For the men who were married, I frequently heard the following: "I love my family--my wife and children. I have these homosexual attractions, and I am only able to have a sexual relationship with my wife when I fantasize about having sex with a man. I have thought about becoming involved with a gay partner, but I want to honor my commitment to marriage and family. I really don't want the attractions. These homosexual feelings never really felt like a part of me or who I really am. Can you help me diminish the homosexual attractions and increase my sexual attractions for my wife?"

Many in the mental health professions would have me refuse to provide such psychological care to individuals even when such therapy is based on their request. They would have me say something like the following "a homosexual orientation is fixed and unmodifiable. I can only help you become more comfortable with your homosexual attractions."

There is a considerable body of ideologically inspired "scholarship" which leans toward the notion that homosexuality is so strongly compelled by biological factors that it is indelibly ingrained in a person's core identity, and is therefore not amenable to change. Many of these articles, though well-written, do not reflect good science. In fact, the social advocacy of the articles would suggest a greater reliance on politics than on the scientific method.

There are basically three studies that led activists to trumpet the notion that homosexuality is biologically determined. These studies were conducted by Simon LeVay, Dean Hamer, and the team of Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard. Perhaps a brief review of these studies would lay a good foundation for my lecture today.1

At the time of his research, Simon LeVay was a biological scientist at the Salk Institute in San Diego. He conducted research on the brains of two groups of men: homosexual men and men who LeVay presumed were heterosexual. With a fairly small sample size (19 homosexual men and 16 presumed heterosexual men), LeVay conducted a post-mortem examination focusing on a particular cluster of cells in the hypothalamus known as the INAH-3. He reported that he had found "subtle but significant differences" between the brains of homosexual men and the heterosexual men. LeVay's research had a number of important limitations. He had very little information about the sexual histories of the research participants. Some of the subjects died of AIDS. Although there were differences between experimental and control groups, some presumed heterosexual men had small brain nuclei in the critical area, and some homosexual men had nuclei large enough to be within the normal heterosexual range. Activists proclaimed that the biological roots of homosexuality had been established. Listen to LeVay's interpretation of his research.

But it is important to stress several limitations of the study. First the observations were made on adults who had already been sexually active for a number of years. To make a real compelling case, one would have to show that these neuroanatomical differences existed early in life preferably at birth. Without such data, there is always at least the theoretical possibility that the structural differences are actually the result of differences in sexual behavior perhaps the "use it or lose it" principle. Furthermore, even if the differences in the hypothalamus rise before birth, they might still come about from a variety of causes, including genetic differences, differences in stress exposure, and many others. It is possible that the development of the INAH-3 (and perhaps other brain regions) represent a 'final common path' in the determination of sexual orientation, a path to which innumerable factors may contribute.2

Quoting LeVay,

Another limitation arises because most of the gay men whose brains I studied died of complications of AIDS. Although I am confident that the small size of INAH-3 in these men was not an effect of the disease, there is always the possibility that gay men who died of AIDS are not representative of the entire population of gay men... It will not be possible to settle this issue definitively until some method becomes available to measure the size of INAH-3 in living people who can be interviewed in detail about their sexuality.3

Further, LeVay summarized his research results in the following way:

It's important to stress what I didn't find. I did not prove that homosexuality was genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain INAH-3 is less likely to be the sole gay nucleus of the brain than a part of a chain of nuclei engaged in men and women's sexual behavior...Since I looked at adult brains we don't know if the differences I found were there at birth, or if they appeared later.4

Commenting on the brain and sexual behavior, Dr. Mark Breedlove, a scientist as the University of California at Berkeley, demonstrated that sexual behavior can actually change brain structure. Referring to his research, Breedlove states, "These findings give us proof for what we theoretically know to be the case--that sexual experience can alter the structure of the brain, just as genes can alter it. It is possible that differences is sexual behavior cause (rather than are caused) by differences in the brain.5

Later, in his book Queer Science, LeVay offered additional clarification regarding biology and homosexuality:

Although there are significant differences between the attitudes of lesbians and gay men it is clear that both groups are far more inclined to consider their sexual orientation a biological given than is the general population....Should we take these assertions seriously? Not entirely, of course. No one even remembers being born, let alone being born gay or straight. When a gay man, for example, says he was born gay he generally means that he felt different from other boys at the earliest age he can remember. Sometimes the difference involved sexual feelings, but more commonly it involved some kind of gender nonconformist or sex atypical traits-disliking rough and tumble play for example, that were not explicitly sexual. These differences, which have been verified in a number of ways suggest that sexual orientation is influenced by factors operating very early in life, but these factors could still consist of environmental factors such as parental treatment in the early postnatal period.6

Finally, LeVay made an interesting observation about the emphasis on the biology of homosexuality. He noted, "...people who think that gays and lesbians are born that way are more likely to support gay rights."7

Bailey and Pillard Study

The next study was conducted by Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard who focused on identical twins, non-identical twins, non-adopted siblings and adopted siblings. In their sample, they had 56 sets of identical twins and 54 sets of non-identical twins. They found a 52% concordance rate for the identical twins which means that for every homosexual twin, the chances were about 50% that his twin would also be homosexual. For non-identical twins, the rate was about 22%, showing that about 1 in 5 twins who were homosexual had a homosexual brother also. For non-twin brothers, the concordance rate was 9.2%. Interesting enough, Bailey and Pillard found that the concordance rate in adopted brothers was 11.2%.

The most fascinating question, however, is that if there is something in the genetic code that makes an individual homosexual, why did not all of the identical twins become homosexual since they have the exact same genetic endowment? Neil Whitehead provided some comparative data on twin studies. The concordance rate for identical twins on measures of extroversion is 50%, religiosity is 50%, divorce is 52%, racial prejudice and bigotry is 58%. From the Bailey and Pillard study one has to conclude that environmental influences play a strong role in the development of homosexuality.8

Hamer Study

The third study, and perhaps the most sensationalized of the three studies since it emerged at the time of the controversy surrounding gays in the military during the Clinton era, was conducted by Hamer et al. Dean Hamer was a senior scientist at the National Cancer Institute. Hamer and his group attempted to link male homosexuality to a stretch of DNA located at the tip of the X chromosome, the chromosome that some men inherit from their mothers. In Hamer's study, he examined 40 pairs of non-identical gay brothers and asserted that 33 pairs--a number significantly higher than the 20 pairs that chance would dictate--had inherited the same X-linked genetic markers from their mothers.9

Criticism of Hamer's research came from a surprising source: George Risch, the scientist at Yale University School of Medicine who invented the method used by Hamer. Risch commented, "Hamer et al suggest that their results are consistent with X-linkage because maternal uncles have a higher rate of homosexual orientation than paternal uncles, and cousins related through a maternal aunt have a higher rate than other types of cousins. However, neither of these results are statistically significant."10

Commenting on his own research Hamer noted,

We knew genes were only part of the answer. We assumed the environment also played a role in sexual orientation, as it does in most, if not all behaviors... (Hamer & Copeland, 1994, p. 82). Homosexuality is not purely genetic...environment plays a role. There is not a single master gene that makes people gay...I don't think we will ever be able to predict who will be gay.11

Citing the failure of his research, Hamer further wrote, "The pedigree failed to produce what we originally hope to find: simple Mendelian inheritance. In fact, we never found a single family in which homosexuality was distributed in the obvious pattern that Mendel observed in his pea plants."12

What is more intriguing is that when Hamer's study was replicated by Rice et al with research that was more robust, the genetic markers were found to be nonsignificant. Rice et al concluded:

"It is unclear why our results are so discrepant from Hamer's original study. Because our study was larger than that of Hamer et al's, we certainly had adequate power to detect a genetic effect as large as reported in that study. Nonetheless, our data do not support the presence of a gene of large effect influencing sexual orientation at position XQ 28 .13

When asked by Anastasia Toufexis, a Time reporter, whether his theory ruled out social and psychological influences, Hamer's response was "Absolutely not, ...from twin studies we already know that half or more of the variability in sexual orientation is not inherited. Our studies try to pinpoint the genetic factors, not to negate the psychosocial factors."14

In summarizing the biological studies on homosexuality Byne and Parsons offer the following summary, "Recent studies postulate biologic factors as the primary basis for sexual orientation. However, there is no evidence at present to substantiate a biologic theory, just as there is no evidence to support any singular psychosocial explanation. While all behavior must have an ultimate biologic substrate, the appeal of current biologic explanations for sexual orientation may derive more from a dissatisfaction with the current status of psychosocial explanations than from a substantiating body of experimental data. Critical review shows the evidence favoring a biologic theory to be lacking. In alternative model, temperamental and personality traits interact with the familial and social milieus as the individual's sexuality emerges. Because such traits may be heritable or developmentally influenced by hormones, the model predicts an apparent non-zero heritability for homosexuality without requiring that either genes or hormones directly influence sexual orientation per se."15

Independently, Friedman and Downey noted that credible evidence is lacking for a biological model of homosexuality.16 They conclude that "human sexual orientation is complex and diversely experienced and that a biopsychosocial model best fits the current state of knowledge in the field."17

So what does all of this mean about biology and the genesis of homosexuality? Critical reviews of the studies attempting to link biology and homosexuality, and subsequent acknowledgments by the researchers themselves, yield only one conclusion: biology alone is insufficient to explain the development of homosexuality. Any reputable scientist, regardless of which side of the political debate he or she embraces, when asked whether homosexuality is nature or nurture, must answer "yes." What is fascinating is that more than 50 % of the scientists who report research in this area are self-identified as gay or lesbian. This is disproportionate to the 2-3% (The Kinsey myth that 10% of the population is homosexual has been thoroughly discredited) which is the current estimate of the number of homosexual men and women in the population.

The developmental biologist form Brown University, Dr. Anne Fausto-Sterling, a self-identified lesbian, offers some interesting insight. Referring to the "born that way" argument, she states:

It provides a legal argument that is, at this moment, actually having some sway in court. For me, it's a very shaky place. It's bad science and bad politics. It seems to me that the way we consider homosexuality in our culture is an ethical and a moral question.

When asked about how much of her thinking about change in sexuality comes from her own life, Fausto-Sterling responded,

My interest in gender issues preceded my own life changes. When I first got involved in feminism, I was married. The gender issues did to me what they did to lots of women in the 1970s: they infuriated me. My poor husband, who was a very decent guy, tried as hard as he could to be sympathetic. But he was shut out of what I was doing. The women's movement opened up the feminine in a way that was new to me, and so my involvement made possible my becoming a lesbian. My ex and I are still friends. It is true I call myself as lesbian now because that is the life I am living, and I think it is something you should own up to. At the moment I am in a happy relationship and I don't ever imagine changing. Still, I don't think loving a man is unimaginable.18



Notes
1 Simon LeVay, "A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men," Science 253 (1991), 1034-1037; Dean Hamer, et. al., "A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation," Science 261 (July 1993), 321-326; J. Michael Bailey and Richard C. Pillard, "A genetic study of male sexual orientation," Archives of General Psychiatry 48 (1991), 1089-1096.

2 Simon LeVay, Queer Science. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1996), 143-145.

3 Ibid.

4 D. Nimmons, "Sex and the brain," Discover (March 1994), 64-71.

5 M. Breedlove, "Sex on the brain," Nature 389 (1997), 801.

6 LeVay, Queer Science, 6.

7 Ibid., 282.

8 Neil Whitehead and B. Whitehead, My Genes Made Me Do It! A Scientific Look at Sexual Orientation (Lafayette, Louisiana: Huntington House Publishers, 1999).

9 Dean Hamer, et. al., "A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation."

10 N. Risch, E. Squires-Wheller, and B.J. Keen, "Male sexual orientation and genetic evidence," Nature 262 (1993), 2063-2064.

11 N. Mitchell, "Genetics, sexuality, linked study says," Standard Examiner (April 30, 1995).

12 Dean Hamer and P. Copeland, The Science of Desire (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1994), 104.

13 G.A. Rice, C. Anderson, N. Risch, and G. Ebers, "Male homosexuality: Absence of linkage to microsatellite markers at XQ28," Science 284 (1999), 665-667.

14 Anastasia Toufexis, "New evidence of a gay gene," Time 146 (November 13, 1995), 43.

15 W. Byne and B. Parsons, "Human sexual orientation: The biologic theories reapprised," Archives of General Psychiatry 50 (1993), 229.

16 R.C. Friedman, and J.I. Downey, "Neurobiology and sexual orientation: Current relationships," Journal of Neuropsychiatry 5 (1993), 131-153.

17 R.C. Friedman and J.I. Downey, Sexual Orientation and Psychoanalysis: Sexual Science and Clinical Practice (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002), 131.

18 C. Dreifus, "Exploring what makes us male or female," New York Times Science Section (January 2, 2001).

[SwoleCat]

He said gaytards.



~SC~

[WildCh1ld]

I have to agree with colossus1, I actually asked a couple of gay people I know and most of them said they were either molested or chose to be that way growing up in a enviorment where there was men likieng men, My mom works for a gay/lesbian center and her and like 2 other girls there are the only straight ones (I hope) but anyways they are cool people but I wouldn't kick it with them, Of course there was one in the group that said he was just born it but the other's argued. Plus a friend of mine said her brother admitted turning gay after he had a 3 some (MFM) and got comfortable with cock around him all the time. Now it sucks because he's got H.I.V. and is sick 247. All I'm saying is allot of people just turn gay because they've grown up to think it's okay by people around them.

Just my 2 cents to share..

[colossus1]

After readind my two above posts, no reasonable person can still argue the "im born gay" theory.

[SwoleCat]

got comfortable with cock around him all the time.

Oh the visuals you draw!

~SC~

[SwoleCat]

After readind my two above posts, no reasonable person can still argue the "im born gay" theory.

I don't believe that either, but I am no "expert" on the subject at all.

~SC~

[mark956101957]

Let that be a lesson class when having a threesome always make sure it is two other women not a woman and a man! : )

[SwoleCat]

A threesome for me is......

"I get three, and maybe someday ya'll can get some".......



~SC~

[jasper1968]

lol.....I see

Let's watch the "FAG" talk guys, please.

As much as I am not down w/the gay scene at all, on a message board such as this we need to be politically correct and steer clear from words like fag, faggot, queer, fudge packer, homo, stick licker, pole smoker, etc.

Thanks,

~SC~

[Tock]

After readind my two above posts, no reasonable person can still argue the "im born gay" theory.

Well, I've never claimed that I was born gay. I've assumed I'm gay because of a combination of stuff I was born with and environmental conditions.
But I don't really know, because I haven't spent much time delving into the subject -- I have better things to do.

But who really cares? I'm gay, lots of other people are gay, but being gay isn't a problem until straight people make it a problem and hassle gays. If gay people get your panties in a wad, well, you'll just have to get over it.

We're here, we're queer, get over it . . .

-Tock

[subsailor]

Amen, Brother... preach on!!!

I'm sorry, but I'm not buying it. I think it's a fad or trend if you will. There is absolutely no ****ing way that there are this many gay people. I'm not trying to judge, to each his own, but the whole scene is getting a little old. And this metrosexual crap, where you dress and act gay but are supposedly straight makes no sense what so ever. Every ****ing time I flip on the TV it's nothing but a big god damn pussy influence on America. Every single reality BS show, Real world(ok, MTV altogether) whatever is all this inner emotional homo crap. Whatever happened to cartoons like GI Joe, He-Man, fat Albert, etc. The cartoons now are all Tella Tubbies, Barney, Spongebob, all this stupid shit that no child who is really born to be a heterosexual could identify with anyways! I mean, if your truly born that way then go about your business, but dont bring that bullshit out in public and try telling EVERYBODY that its perfectly ok and acceptible because it's confusing kids who are too young to know any better and the next thing you know its gonna be nothing but a generation of weak, soft, liberal ****ing pussies. Ok, flame away now, I'm ready.

[subsailor]

Well, I've never claimed that I was born gay. I've assumed I'm gay because of a combination of stuff I was born with and environmental conditions.
But I don't really know, because I haven't spent much time delving into the subject -- I have better things to do.

But who really cares? I'm gay, lots of other people are gay, but being gay isn't a problem until straight people make it a problem and hassle gays. If gay people get your panties in a wad, well, you'll just have to get over it.

We're here, we're queer, get over it . . .

-Tock

You know, Tock... I don't think we'll EVER get over it.

[colossus1]

Well, I've never claimed that I was born gay. I've assumed I'm gay because of a combination of stuff I was born with and environmental conditions.
But I don't really know, because I haven't spent much time delving into the subject -- I have better things to do.

But who really cares? I'm gay, lots of other people are gay, but being gay isn't a problem until straight people make it a problem and hassle gays. If gay people get your panties in a wad, well, you'll just have to get over it.

We're here, we're queer, get over it . . .

-Tock

Im not gonna like gays until the day i die.........hell im not gonna like them after i die. I will treat everyone with respect when in public as long as im treated like wise...........gays are humans.......but that doesnt mean ill ever agree with what they do.