Do you think we will ever know what causes Homosexuality

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Why the fuck does it even matter what "causes" it? Will it make a difference? Obviously it isn't a choice, but what if it was? I choose shit every day and what? Ohhh, because if it was a choice it would be "unnatural" and therefore wrong? I chose to take the unnatural Tube to work today instead of walking, and sometimes I take the unnatural bus. Every few weeks I choose to change my hair colour with unnatural dye. Where's my hate party?!

I don't get it, and I doubt I ever will.

And amen!

The only people who have an issue with it have an issue with themselves. After all, something about them must be inadequate if they feel the need to lambast someone else for a harmless 'decision' that doesn't affect them in the fucking slightest.

[TaraJo]

And amen!

The only people who have an issue with it have an issue with themselves. After all, something about them must be inadequate if they feel the need to lambast someone else for a harmless 'decision' that doesn't affect them in the fucking slightest.

Well, I can kinda see why a tabboo on homosexuality would be advantageous to some of the ancient societys that originally wrote a lot of the rules. They were in a constant fight against each other, against the environment, against starvation, against sickness and injuries (many of which we would fix today with a simple prescription for antibiotics).... they had to do damn near everything they could to keep their numbers high enough to continue. Since sex in general can spread disease, they didn't really like too much of that going around, but since they needed reproduction and heterosexual sex helped with that, they allowed it (but only under their own very strict rules and regulations).

I think the people who have a problem with homosexuality are the ones who refuse to admit that society and social needs have changed over the past 5,000 years. No, we aren't in some mad race to reproduce as much as we can; if anything, the world is overpopulated now. And even though STD's can still be spread, we know how to prevent and/or cure them, so it's hardly as much of an issue as it used to be.

So, if the homophobes want to bitch and moan about teh gays, I just like to keep in mind that they're thinking the same way people thought back when people had midlife crisises at 15.

[My imaginary friend is GOD]

The answers don't appear to be psychological, but biological. They have to do with genetics and epigenetics as well as some conditions such as birth order. Their may be environmental factors that "activate" the gay genes, but these are probably not factors such as "an absent male role model" and so on.

[LostLocke]

Why the fuck does it even matter what "causes" it? Will it make a difference?

Exactly.
Like I said, the humanistic, scientific side will want to know 'just because'. That's what science does, but ultimately there would be no weight places on the "cause". No different than knowing what causes hair and eye color.

It's the wackos on the other side that I'm more worried about, once they got this info into their hands...

[bennyboy]

What I'm interested in is whether homosexuality rates are variable depending on conditions. For example, I read (a long time ago) that high levels of stress hormones in a pregnant woman will affect the likelihood that her offspring will be gay. I also saw studies of rats put into high-density populations that resulted in increased homosexual behavior.

Could it be that as the world becomes more and more overcrowded, the percentage of homosexuals will increase? That seems plausible to me, and not to be seen as bad. I mean, 7 billion people and counting, we've pretty much achieved the "be fruitful and multiply" stage of our species' existence. I'd prefer reduced reproductivity to a mathematical necessity for WWIII.

[IAmNotHere]

Actually, we don't even know the cause of heterosexuality, or any sexuality.

Yeah I think once you find the cause of sexuality in general there will be understanding of the different sexualities

[Ksa]

When you go into things like perception, explaining is very hard. Explaining why pain hurts and why pleasure pleases, from a scientific point of view can be very challenging because we are used to describing things that are measurable, like a radioactive sample emitting photons or a heat signature emitting heat.

Pleasure is pretty complex and requires an organ about the size of a nut placed in the center of our brain, that can only be accessed properly through a simultaneous electrical stimulation of the frontal lobe gate and opioid gate, because it is heavily insulated against the affect of any other daily life experience. It is told to produce a pleasure so intense that it leaves nothing to be desired and is by definition the best thing you can obtain while you experience reality through a human body because every other life experience that you may like revolves around a weaker electrical stimulation of that area and so it can be directly compared.

I believe that the highest intensity of pleasure that can be achieved in a human host would be 5,000 times more intense than the pleasure of watching your favorite TV show, 1,000 times more intense than eating your favorite meal while hungry and about 100 times more intense than a sexual intercourse with a hot partner. This will require a mathematically precise simultaneous stimulation of the dopamine D5 receptors by dextro-amphetamine, μ-opioid receptors by 6-MAM metabolite, THC receptors by a combination of agonists, GABA receptors by a combination of agonists, and artificially inducing a frontal lobe epilepsy at a low, sustained voltage.

This will require an ultra-sophisticated computer to deliver the treatment since any human error of even half a milligram of either substance would result in overdose and death.

[LostLocke]

Thanks but no.

I'd still rather get the pleasure from actually watching the TV show, eating the meal, or having sex.

[houseofcantor]

Nature

/thread

The explanatory power of that is in the same league as "god"

Not if you research it.

I believe in evolution. Not only does it have great explanatory power, it provides a basis for my naive mathematical theology of Gwynnite (thus the "believe.") Yet evolution is not about "what is right" so much as "what can we get away with as Nature more visibly selects against, rather than for.

Now I don't know what kinda math you got to use that says "ten percent of males are homosexual" is a bad thing, 'cause I ain't using it.

Back on point: if not evolution, an evolutionary mandate.

[salamenfuckyou]

As a gay guy who is into Psychology I always wonder if we will ever find out what is going on in our minds that define what we are attracted to.

I hope one day we will, but sometimes I hope we don't in-case it drives some people to try and find a "cure" for us

Gay people are not natural, it says so in the bible. Burn faggots BURN!!!

Anyway...
I don`t know about homophillia as I find topics surrounding it very delicate, but I wouldn`t mind us finding a cure for necrophilia, pedophilia, zoosadism, hierophilia, and beastiality. Pretty much.
Because they really aren`t OK, or are they merely fetishes I wonder...Im not sure.

Here let me inject you with this , it`s gonna make you normal like us. yeey
I can`t imagine how it is to be gay in today's patriarchal society with all these homophobic leaders because Im straight, thus since heterosexuality is obviously considered "normal", I have no idea how I would feel if someone told me that my sexuality is not commonplace, and that I should force yourself to be together with boys and not gals.

But if we do find a cure, it should of course be non-mandatory.

PS: If my sarcasm wasn`t picked up properly above, I need to address that I have NOTHING against homosexual individuals.