d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Science, Technology & Nature > Homosexuality: Nature Or Nurture
Prev12345610Next
Closed New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 9,899
Joined: May 7 2006
Gold: 550.00
Dec 11 2009 08:01pm
Quote (Hahkhuearj @ Dec 11 2009 08:37pm)
Doesn't matter, this isn't your religion you can simply arbitrarily take your views on. This is a scientific discussion in which beliefs should be kept to a minimum. :)


You're right. Let's keep the discussion sciency.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/j23w4722m82xw637/
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/refs/213/4504/239
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sci%3B253/5023/1034

Theres always more information out there. I suggest doing a search for it instead of asking a gaming forum.

www.pubmed.com and google scholar are pretty decent.
Member
Posts: 20,217
Joined: Mar 20 2007
Gold: 431.00
Dec 11 2009 08:08pm
Quote (juliusjuice @ Dec 11 2009 06:58pm)
why do you care if they are gay or not?

i dont think it has anything to do with genetics, its upbringing/personal choice whatever you want to call it.


he's obviously a fundamentalist christian

Member
Posts: 6,111
Joined: Jun 25 2007
Gold: 1.69
Dec 18 2009 12:54am
Definitely not nature. If its nature, then it would be considered natural, its obviously not natural seeing as two male reproductive systems cannot create a child therefore life would essentially cease. There would also be just as many gays as straights if it was natural. I think its more by choice. If doctors can tell if a baby is mentally retarded or anything like that (thats not obvious at birth) they would be able to tell if a child is gay imo. IDK its my opinions
Member
Posts: 5,046
Joined: Aug 8 2009
Gold: 607.00
Dec 18 2009 04:36am
Quote (darkgimp @ Dec 18 2009 02:54pm)
Definitely not nature. If its nature, then it would be considered natural, its obviously not natural seeing as two male reproductive systems cannot create a child therefore life would essentially cease. There would also be just as many gays as straights if it was natural. I think its more by choice. If doctors can tell if a baby is mentally retarded or anything like that (thats not obvious at birth) they would be able to tell if a child is gay imo. IDK its my opinions


What the fuck, have you even taken a high school biology course before? Can't believe you even considered some of the stuff you said. First, homosexuality is not genetic. There would be no more gays left, they would have all died out. Two, even if was, that doesn't mean there would be an equal balance of gays and straights, just as there is not a balance in eye color or hair color. Three, there are lots of things that doctors won't be able to tell about babies when they are born. Four, saying that people "choose" to be gay implies that gays can "choose" to be straight. Which is not true, some gays have supposedly become straight by going to certain organizations but a lot of others have not been able to do it.

It's not nature like in genetics, but neither is it nurture in the sense that homosexuality can be "chosen".
Member
Posts: 28,718
Joined: Aug 1 2008
Gold: 13.00
Dec 18 2009 05:01am
This is a gay thread.
Member
Posts: 17,647
Joined: Mar 20 2009
Gold: 1,250.92
Dec 18 2009 10:08am
both
Member
Posts: 38,770
Joined: Sep 14 2005
Gold: 12,839.39
Dec 18 2009 10:23am
Quote (Sharkpark @ Dec 18 2009 05:36am)
What the fuck, have you even taken a high school biology course before? Can't believe you even considered some of the stuff you said. First, homosexuality is not genetic. There would be no more gays left, they would have all died out. Two, even if was, that doesn't mean there would be an equal balance of gays and straights, just as there is not a balance in eye color or hair color. Three, there are lots of things that doctors won't be able to tell about babies when they are born. Four, saying that people "choose" to be gay implies that gays can "choose" to be straight. Which is not true, some gays have supposedly become straight by going to certain organizations but a lot of others have not been able to do it.

It's not nature like in genetics, but neither is it nurture in the sense that homosexuality can be "chosen".


....

under your belief that no more gays would be left if it was genetic would be like saying there are no more people left with sickle cell anemia.


i personally believe its a mix of the two. genetics can predisposition one to have homosexual tendencies but then how they are brought up may change their tendencies.

This post was edited by cialda on Dec 18 2009 10:25am
Member
Posts: 11,690
Joined: Mar 10 2007
Gold: 6,167.24
Dec 18 2009 06:28pm
i think:
Nature
Member
Posts: 8,969
Joined: Sep 7 2005
Gold: 252.00
Dec 19 2009 04:49pm
Quote
Does it really matter? Let say today it was proved it was 100% nature (or nurture for that matter). What difference would it make? What changes do you think should be made based on the findings in my scenario?

yes. i think if proven nature, it will help change culture in a positive way.

Quote
if this was true then why would someone brought up around sports and a more male dominated life still be homosexual , the same as a girl being brought up by a male dominated life and still can be either straight or gay

Quote
As far as the people saying being raised playing with barbies makes you like dudes, the ancient greeks didn't have barbies. Our conceptions of masculinity and femininity are societal constructs. It has nothing to do with gender orientation


I think you guys are on to something.
imo no1 is completely straight. imo the percentage of gayness is made before birth. then, the behavior based on that will change depending on nurture.

I think alot of men in america for example , shut out their gayness or act gay in ways they do not even realize.

Quote
Definitely not nature. If its nature, then it would be considered natural, its obviously not natural seeing as two male reproductive systems cannot create a child therefore life would essentially cease. There would also be just as many gays as straights if it was natural. I think its more by choice. If doctors can tell if a baby is mentally retarded or anything like that (thats not obvious at birth) they would be able to tell if a child is gay imo. IDK its my opinions


Imo it is kinda weird and unnatural if some1 is truly 100% hetero. imo quueernes is really important for building social structures.

This post was edited by Grippster on Dec 19 2009 04:50pm
Member
Posts: 13,796
Joined: Apr 16 2006
Gold: 140.00
Dec 20 2009 09:22am
Quote (Sharkpark @ Dec 18 2009 10:36am)
What the fuck, have you even taken a high school biology course before? Can't believe you even considered some of the stuff you said. First, homosexuality is not genetic. There would be no more gays left, they would have all died out. Two, even if was, that doesn't mean there would be an equal balance of gays and straights, just as there is not a balance in eye color or hair color. Three, there are lots of things that doctors won't be able to tell about babies when they are born. Four, saying that people "choose" to be gay implies that gays can "choose" to be straight. Which is not true, some gays have supposedly become straight by going to certain organizations but a lot of others have not been able to do it.

It's not nature like in genetics, but neither is it nurture in the sense that homosexuality can be "chosen".


Have YOU ever taken a high school biology class before?

Homosexuality is most likely a genetic alteration, of some prowess, considering it is found largely in the animal kingdom; most prominently among primates. This along shows that our closest living relative in the evolutionary chain has this trait as an instinctual process; thus making us more likely to have the same trait. In this way, "gays" would not "die out" considering the code would in some manner live within all of us (most likely a recessive trait). Not to mention almost every human being has an inclination at one point to the same gender.
Go Back To Science, Technology & Nature Topic List
Prev12345610Next
Closed New Topic New Poll