Posted on 08/29/2019 10:53:19 PM PDT by zipper
Bookmark
Nice try, but wrong.
Then you must know very few gay men.
“A gay gene wouldn’t make sense”
Precisely.....natural selection would have weeded it out early
If there was such a gene I wonder how many on the left would be for abortion then!
True. Yet the homosexuals are probably increasing in overall percentage due to the fact that the adults in our society have managed to use their influence to incrementally implement increasingly libertine laws and societal standards, which gives the adult perverts more access to children. So in the long run more children (especially adolescents) are corrupted and become adult perverts themselves.
The writer ( and regular debate protagonist of conservative author Bill Buckley ), GORE VIDAL was gay himself.
He however, refused to be called homosexual and insisted that we are all potentially bi-sexual.
Writing for an edition of Esquire magazine in 1969, he wrote:
Quote:
“We are all bisexual to begin with. That is a fact of our condition. And we are all responsive to sexual stimuli from our own as well as from the opposite sex. [...] regardless of tribal taboos, homosexuality is a constant fact of the human condition and it is not a sickness, not a sin, not a crime [...] Homosexuality is as natural as heterosexuality. Notice I use the word ‘natural,’ not normal.”
This for me, explains why a lot of gay activists want schools to “educate” children to “find” their own innate sexuality. They want company. The more, the better.
I take it you are from the East. Nobody in the West
would use the term “dungaree”. I’m talking circa 60s.
When I was in my early teens my family moved to
Hyattsville, MD for a year so my dad could work on
his PhD at U of MD. It was culture shock for a small
town Cali kid. If you wore dungarees of any brand you
were an outcast in Prince Georges County, MD. And there
was actually a brand of denim pants called Dungarees.
I think LEVIS got so big the name became generic for
jeans. Maybe that was true for Dungarees in the East.
Come to think of it other than regional fads there
could also have been a urban/rural aspect to the
clothing styles. Everybody around me in PG County
wore slacks. I got rid of mine fast when we came
back to Cali. By then light blue (baby blue?)
LEVIS were the style and I think they were pre
pegged or maybe just cut tighter in the legs
as compared to 501s.
I could have been your older brother...my mom hated
sewing. She said she got A’s in HS Home Ec in everything
but flunked sewing. My dad probably bought her the
sewing machine w/out knowing that.
The evolution of mass communications has clearly
effected styles. Regional fads in anything seem
rare.
Of course there isn’t!
You WEREN’T “born that way”!
It’s 100% about the deviant, exciting, perverted SEX!
When they say it’s not about the sex, it’s about the sex.
Yes, they must recruit children — pederasty is common among male homosexuals — our government even made a hero out of one of them: Harvey Milk.
Harvey Milk, the pederast:
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/274705/predator-vs-pederast-lloyd-billingsley
Ha! That one tickled me.
A recessive gene if not replicated does not stay in the gene pool.
I believe that there were some methodological flaws with the LeVay study, and it suffered from a lack of replication. I’m not sure that LeVay himself believed that this gene determined homosexuality, but rather that it influenced it.
[I believe that there were some methodological flaws with the LeVay study, and it suffered from a lack of replication. I’m not sure that LeVay himself believed that this gene determined homosexuality, but rather that it influenced it.]
LeVay’s finding was widely reported in the media.[3] LeVay openly related his research to his own homosexuality and to his mourning over his lover’s death from AIDS.[4] LeVay cautioned against misinterpreting his findings in a 1994 interview: “It’s important to stress what I didn’t find. I did not prove that homosexuality is 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. The INAH3 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.”[5] Some critics of LeVay questioned the accuracy and appropriateness of his measurements, observing that the structures are difficult to see in tissue slices and that he measured in volume rather than cell count.[6] Nancy Ordover writes that LeVay has been criticized for “his small sample size and for compiling inadequate sexual histories.”[7] ]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.